DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 120 068 SO 008 970

AUTHOR Gillespie, Judith A.; Lazarus, StuartTITLE Clean Air Now: Political Issues. Comparing Political

Experiences, Experimental Edition.INSTITUTION American Political Science Association, Washington,

D.C.; Social Studies Development Center, Bloomington,Ind.

SPONS AGENCY National SCience Foundation, Washington, D.C.PUB DATE 75NOTE 144p.; For related documents, see SO 008 957-972

EDRS PRICE MR-$0.83 HC-$7.35 Plus PostageDESCRIPTORS Case Studies; Change Strategies; Class Activities;

*Community Action; Community Change; ConceptTeaching; Course Content; Documentaries; Grade 12;Instructional Materials; Political Influences;*Political Issues; *Political Science; Politics;*Pollution; Secondary Education; *Social StudiesUnits

IDENTIFIERS California (Riverside); *Comparing PoliticalExperiences; High School Political Science CurriculumProject

ABSTRACTThe fourth unit to the second-semester "Comparing

Political Experiences" course focuses on a specific, controversial,political issue. Using a documentary approach, this unit analyzes theconcept of political change by examining the changes in Riverside,California, as that community confronts the issue of smog. The unitis divided into five student activities. The first activityintroduces students to the geographic area of southern California,the causes and effects of smog, the effect of smog on Riverside, andthe' political environment in Riverside. Activity 2 explores theconcept of mobilization and how has affected the smog issue.Activity 3 introduces the concept of political innovation and the wayit affects change. Students focus on the court case "Riverside vs.Ruckelshaus" as an illustration of political innovation. Activity 4examines how the concept of interdependence affects change and theextent to which Riverside became interdependent with aspects of thepolitical environment. Activity 5 teaches students how to forecastthe future of a political system erperiencing change by examiningalternative futures for Riverside. Each activity contains thenecessary student materials and student discussion questions. A datapacket of supplementary readings and exercises is also included.(Author/DE)

Comparin olitical Experiences

U S DEPARTMENTOF HEALTH,

EDUCATION L WELFARENATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR

ORGANIZATION ORIGIN-ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED DO NOT

NECESSARILY REPRE-SENT OFFICIALNATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY

"PERMISSION TOREPRODUCE THIS COPY-RIGHTED MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

<Tabik ghl/eS/bie,TO ERIC AND

ORGANIZATIONS OPERATINGUNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE NATIONAL IN-STITUTE OF EDUCATION.

FURTHER REPRO-DUCTION OUTSIDE THEERIC SYSTEM RE-OUIRES PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHTOWNER"

-

Judith GillespieStuart Lazarus

1111.1110..

COMPARING POLITICAL EXPERIENCES

POLITICAL ISSUES

CLEAN AIR NOW

Judith GillespieStuart Lazarus

EXPERIMENTALMATERIALS

High School Political Science Curriculum ProjectSocial Studies Development Center

513 North Park StreetIndiana University

Bloomington, Indiana 47401

lintlp op

These experimental curriculum materials are part of a two-semester highschool coursL, Comparing Political Experiences. The materials constituteone unit of one semester, Political jssues. The course is being developedby the High School Political Science Curriculum Project, which is one ofthe projects sponsored by the American Political Science Associatinn'sCommittee on Pre-Collegiate Education. The project is supported by fundsprovided by the National Science Foundation. These materials cannot beduplicated, reproduced or used in any manner without the specific writtenapproval of the High School Political Science Curriculum Project.

3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many members of the High School Political Science Curriculum Project

have contributed to the development of this unit. Ma project is co-

directed by Judith Gillespie, Howard Mehlinger and John Patrick. Dave

Lambert has served as coordinator of the development of evaluation

materials and is in charge of pilot testing for the program. Howard

Mehlinger carries responsibility for the diffusion dimension of the

program. Martin Sampson administers and coordinates pilot school

activities. Judith Gillespie and Stuart Lazarus are directly responsible

for the materials developed in this unit.

Several instructional developers and artists have made important

contributions to this unit. We would like to offer acknowledgments to

each of them for their contributions:

Joel Pett: Various illustrations in Activities One,Two and Four; maps in Activities One,Three, and Four.

Nina Thayer: The production work on the audio tape,"A View From The Top," in Activity One.

Michael Viera: The case materials for "Ten Years Back"in Activity One.

B'Ann Wright: The case materials for "South Austin Changes"in Activity Four.

Each of these people continue to provide a creative and important

intellectual stimulus for our work.

4

We also wish to acknowledge the sponsorship of the American Political

Science Association's Committee on Pre-Collegiate Education. Throughout

the life of the project, the Committee members have provided important

support and input into the project. The committee members are: Richard

Snyder, Chairman, Ohio State University; Lee Anderson, Northwestern

University; Laurily Epstein, Washington University; Leslie McLemore,

Jackson State College; Howard Mehlinger, Indiana University; Jewel

Prestage, Southern University; Judith Torney, University of Illinois,

Circle Campus; Harmon Zeigler, University of Oregon. Since March, 1972

the project has also received continuous support with funds provided by

the National Science Foundation. Without this funding we could not

undertake such an experimental program, nor could we support extensive

field tests of the materials.

This unit is based on a great deal of interview material gathered in

Riverside, California in the winter of 1974. We are grateful to many

members of the city government who helped us to gather first-hand infor-

mation about their city. Thanks to the help of the citizens of Riverside,

we were able to gather some public sentiment concerning smog. Of particular

help were the officers and members of Clean Air Now. Much of the material

included in this unit is taken from the extensive interviews we conducted

in Riverside. Finally, we owe a special thanks to Michael Viera, a

doctoral student in Political Science at the University of California in

Riverside. He engaged in tasks ranging from research to photo printing

to writing case materials. Mike provided the missing link in our absence

from Riverside.

ii

5

We have also been demonstrably aided in our efforts to develop and

teat materials by ideas, critiques and site evaluations from our local

field consultants. The field consultant network began as an effort to

join university-based political scientists and social studies educators

with each of the pilot schools. The success of the network has far

exceeded our original expectations. The consultants have worked with the

pilot schools and critiqued materials. Eight people are also engaged in

providing case materials on schools to aid in the development of

instructional units. The consultants are listed below. The asterisks

refer to those individuals who are engaged in gathering case materials:

*Hal BargerDept. of Political ScienceTrinity University715 Stadium DriveSan Antonio, Texas 78284

George BehlenHistory DepartmentYoungstown State UniversityYoungstown, Ohio

*Winsten CoxDepartment of Political ScienceHoward UniversityWashington, D.C. 20001

*Chris GarciaDepartment of Political ScienceUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerque, New Mexico 87101

Maurice GuysenirDepartmentiof Secondary EducationNorthwestern Illinois UniversityBryn Mawr at St. Louis AvenueChicago, Illinois 60625

Michael HartoonianDepartment of Public Instruction126 Langdon StreetMadison, Wisconsin 53702

6

*Mary .HepburnDepartment of Social Science EducationDudley HallUniversity of GeorgiaAthens, Georgia 30601

Ray HinerSchool of EducationUniversity of KansasLawrence, Kansas 66044

Ruth Jon,is

Department of Political Science8001 Natural Bridge RoadUniversity of Missouri-St. LouisSt. Louis, Missouri 63121

Morris Lewenstein. Department of Social ScienceCalifornia State University,

San Francisco1600 Holloway DriveSan Francisco, California 94132

Sarah LiebschutzDepartment of Political ScienceSUNY at BrockportBrockport, New York 14420

Jack LowryDepartment of EducationUniversity of California at Davis

Davis, California 95616

James McKennyDepartment of Political ScienceWichita State UniversityWichita, Kansas 67208

Orvill MinardDepartment of Political ScienceUniversity of NebraskaOmaha, Nebraska

Dr. Manindra Mohapatra

Associate Professor of PoliticalScience

Old Dominion UniversityLafayette, Virginia 23508

Willis Moreland,Department of Social Education104 Hensly HallUniversity of NebraskaLincoln Nebraska

*James OswaldIntercultural Studies ProgramAmerican Universities Field Staff,3 Lebanon StreetHanover, New Hampshire 03755

Richard RemyMershon CenterThe Ohio State University199 West 10th AvenueColumbus, Ohio 43201

Jack SimpsonDepartment of Curriculum &

InstructionEnderis 377University of WisconsinMilwaukee, Wisconsin 53201

Jim StevensDirector of Financial AidsMarietta CollegeMarietta, Ohio 45750

George Stoumbis

Department of Secondary EducationMesa Vista HallUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerque, New Mexico 87101

*Jan TuckerCollege of EducationFlorida International UniversityTamiami Trail

Miami, Florida 33144

Ronald UrickDepartment of Interdisciplinary

Teacher EducationCollege of EducationWayne State UniversityDetroit, Michigan 48202

Thomas Volgy

Department of GovernmentThe University.of ArizonaTucson, Arizona 85721

Dennis WiedmannDepartment of Political ScienceCarroll CollegeHelena, Montana 59601

*Karen WileySocial Science Education Consortium855 BroadwayBoulder, Colorado 80302

*Maurice WoodardDepartment of Political ScienceHoward UniversityWashington, D.C. 20001

Edward WynneCollege of EducationUniversity of Illinois at Chicago

CircleBox 4348Chicago, Illinois 60680

Special thanks is extended to the pilot teachers who are testing these

materials this year. Past evaluations from many teachers and from students

have produced many insights into the strength and feasibility of our ideas.

7iv

This unit is a far different piece than was originally conceived because

of their advice in its developmental stages. The pilot teachers testing

Political Issues materials for the 1975-76 school year are listed below:

Joe BartgesGeorge Washington High School1522 Tennis Club RoadCharleston, West Virginia 25314

Diane BollingRoxbury High School335 GreenvilleBoston, Massachusetts

David BonnetteFrontier High SchoolRoute 2, Box 45New Matamoras, Ohio 45767

Tom CastellanoClyde-Savannah High School215 Glasgow StreetClyde, New York 14433

Tom CoatsSouth Dade Senior High School24801 S.W. 167th Avenue,Homestead, Florida 33030

Bob CookRio Americano High School4540 American River DriveSacramento, California 95825

Diana CubbageWichita High School North1437 RochesterWichita, Kansas 67203

William DaleyKellam High SchoolRFD 2, Box 2010Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456

v

Tony GauthierLawrence High School19th and Louisiana StreetsLawrence, Kansas 66044

Rosemary GindhartDelta High SchoolRural Route #1Muncie, Indiana 47302

Charles GordonFremont Senior High School1750 North Lincoln AvenueFremont, Nebraska 68025

Doug JenischHanover High SchoolLebanon StreetHanover, New Hampshire 03755

Harold KellerCentral Catholic High School14.3 North St. Mary'sSan Antonio, Texas 72815

Richard F. KraftLos Altos High School15321 E. Los Robles AvenueHacienda Heights, California 91745

James KrollMilwaukee Trade and Technical

High School319 West Virginia StreetMilwaukee, Wisconsin 53204

Shirley S. MantloFenger High School11220 South WallaceChicago, Illinois 60628

Linda MatarreseEast High School1545 Detroit StreetDenver, Colorado 80206

Tom Obrecht and Rachel GroggNorth High School1550 Third StreetRiverside, California 92507

John O'ConnorHyde Park High School655 Metropolitan AvenueBoston, Massachusetts 02136

Steven PrigohzyFriends School in Detroit1100 St. AubinDetroit, Michigan 48207

Richard SaulThe Rayan School250 Bonita AvenueYoungstown, Ohio 44540

Ray VandersteenBloomington High School North3901 Kinser PikeBloomington, Indiana 47401

David VictorLake Park High School6N 600 Medinah RoadRoselle, Illinois 60172

Sara R. VihcentElbert County High SchoolForest AvenueElberton, Georgia 30635

Marge WhatleyHouston Independent School District4100 Chartres StreetHouston, Texas 77004

Elise WhyteAnacostia High School16th and R Streets, S.E.Washington, D.C. 20020

All of these people have demonstrably influenced the way this unit

has been developed. However, the responsibility for the ideas and

approaches taken in the materials should not be attributed to the APSA

Pre-Collegiate Committee, the National Science Foundation, the consultants

or the pilot teachers. Although their contributions continue to be

invaluable, responsibility for the ideas presented here rests with the

authors.

Judith GillespieStuart Lazarus

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACTIVITY ONE: A View From the Top 1

ACTIVITY TWO: Clean Air Now 39

ACTIVITY THREE: Riverside in Court 85

ACTIVITY FOUR: More Groups 112

ACTIVITY FIVE: What Next for Riverside? 125

vii

ACTIVITY ONE: A VIEW FROM THE TOP

These drawings depict the same city, Riverside, California. The

drawing on the left shows Riverside on a clear sunny day. The drawing

on the right shows Riverside blanketed with smog. To begin work with

the unit, speculate answers to the following questions. As you work

with these materials, you may ret.irn to these questions and revise your

answers.

1. How might you account for the smog problem?

11

-2-

2. What actions could citizens in Riverside take to combat the smog?

3. Whose help would be crucial to obtain?

Radio stations in many large cities in the United States hire

helicopters to report the flow of traffic from the air. These reports

often help to zero in on traffic congestion and to identify alternative

routes for motorists. You will hear a helicopter reporter, Dave Bresbank,

as he describes the traffic situation over Los Angeles, California on a

typical summer afternoon. The broadcast could have occurred on the radio

just as you will hear it on the recording.

As you listen, study the maps which fold out of the text. They point

out the area of southern California commonly known as the South Coast Air

Basin. This unit focuses on one of the cities which lies in the basin --

Riverside, California. Like other cities in the area, it suffers in

several ways due to the smog in southern California.

12

r

OREGO N

LAKE TAHOE

0 SACRAMENTO

SAN FRANCISCO

SANTA CRUZ

1 inch = 85 miles

BAKERSFIELD

mountainous,

areas

LOS ANGELES

SOUTH COAST *caAIR BASIN

13

ri EY. I

................................

an Gabriel Mountains

S

Santa Barbara

a

tft

Hollywood '4,

Cajon Pass

. ....

......

..

'San Gorgonio

\Beverly Hills

Santa Monica

Pasadena

44-

4".

.1%

Arcadia

Duarte Azusa

San Bernardino

Mountains

4-

LEV

EL

INT

ER

CH

AN

GE.v

5M

ON

ICA

fvX

SA

NT

ASan Bernardino

Culver City

LOS ANGELES

PACIFIC OCEAN

Location

of Basin

mom

F.WY

Pomona

Anaheim

RiV

ER

SID

E

Santa Ana

FWY

.

Long

Beach.

Huntington Beach

71

Sou

th C

oast

Air

Bas

in

Paim SprinFs

1 inch = 25 miles

-3-

A View From The Top

Ron Hill:

That was a new one by What's It To Ya, a young group headed toward

the top. It's 55 minutes past the big hour of three o'clock on the

Ron Hill show. We've got a fine summer southern California day, 85

degrees and no clouds in sight.

At four o'clock, K-CPE will bring you the late breaking news stories

of the day, a complete sports wrap-up and a look at tomorrow's weather.

First, though, let's switch to Dave Bresbank who's flying over the city

in oust K-CPE helicopter. Dave has some traffic tips for any Of you folks

headed home for the weekend. Dave, what's happening up there?

Dave Bresbank:

Thanks, Ron. Traffic seems to be moving along pretty well as people

hustle home this Friday. Right now we're making a slow circle over the

Beverly Hills-Hollywood area -- lot of beautiful people down there, you

know, Ron.

Now we're moving east toward Alhambra, El Monte, San Bernardino and

the Riverside area. We're going to take a few extra minutes in our

"View From The Top" report today -- we're not only going to tell you where

you're moving down there on the snarled freeways, but we're also going

to let you know where the smog's moving. It seems to be particularly

smoggy today and we plan to follow the path of the smog as it moves out

toward the Riverside area. This is part of our continuing effort at K-CPE

to keep you, the listener, well informed.

-4-

Since it's 4:00 p.m., most of the smog has drifted inland from

Los Angeles and has moved into the valley surrounded by the San

Bernardino, San Gabriel and Santa Ana mountains. On hot summer days

like this, the smog is really intense -- and, we're seeing evidence of

that right now.

First, a few tips to you drivers leaving the city. We're headed

east over the beautiful Santa Monica freeway. We just passed over

Culver City, and the intersection with the San Diego freeway is clear.

The traffic seems to be moving well in all directions as we head east to

the intersection with the Harbor freeway.

We're turning slightly north now as the Harbor freeway turns to the

Civic Center area and the four-level interchange. It looks to me like

two semi's collided at the junction of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana

freeways. One of them has jacknifed and we've got at least 12 cars piled

up in a chain reaction. You'll want to stay away from that area today,

folks. You can expect a 15-minute delay at the interchange area. The

police down below tell us that, fortunately, no one is seriously hurt in

that mess of two trucks and 12 cars. Traffic is backed up for at least

four miles in all directions. Folks, if you're headed out south or east,

I'd avoid that area like the plague. The Golden State freeway or the

Pamona freeway are both good alternate routes.

Wow! We can really see that low, dark layer of smog as it moves

out in the direction of the Pasadena freeway. We'll leave it now, though,

as we head farther east and follow the San Bernardino freeway toward Upland,

Ontario and all the way out to Riverside. The traffic is thinning as we

16

-5-

move east following the San Gabriel mountains. Even this late in the

summer, San Gorgonio mountain, in the San Bernardinos, is snow capped

and it's just real beautiful. We can see it rising above the smog layer,

more than 20 miles away. That's a sight you people on the ground seldom

see!

One of the things which might interest you is the way the smog gets

hemmed in by the peaks of the San Gabriel, San Bernardino and Santa Ana

mountains. The smog just moves right out from Los Angeles and gets trapped

by the mountains which surround the San Bernardino-Riverside area. There's

no way for it to get out. You can actually see a thick, dark layer of

smog settled low over the valley which we are just flying over. There's

only one escape for the smog. Where the San Gabriels meet the San

Bernardino mountains at Cajon pass, smog can get through to the desert

communities beyond.

Hold it, Ron! We just spotted some trouble on the San Bernardino

freeway, as we move up toward Covina at the intersection of Azuza Avenue.

Looks to me as though there's a funeral procession and the police are

holding up the other vehicles while the funeral proceeds by. It has,

however, resulted in lines and lines of cars backed up at least half a

mile on.the San Bernardino freeway, and one fourth of a mile on either

side of Azuza Avenue. Other than that one snarl, the traffic looks

pretty good; so, we're going to move on out toward Riverside.

The smog's particularly bad today. We've had reports from Riverside

that schools have been let out early, all outdoor athletic events have

been cancelled and people with heart and respiratory ailments have been

,17

-6-

warned to stay inside due to the intensity of the smog. As usual, the

smog should dissipate by 7:00 p.m. and the area should be clear again

by late evening. It will remain that way until early tomorrow morning

when people start to drive into Los Angeles, building up more of the filth.

Then the cycle will start again with the smog moving out to Riverside.

That's the traffic and smog report for now. I'll give it back to

you, Ron.

That portion of the recording you have just heard provides information

about smog in the South Coast Air Basin. Think about the recording for

a moment and.then answer the questions which follow. List at least two

responses in each column.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Where does thesmog come from?

What causes thesmog?

What effect doesthe smog have on

people?

1 8

-7-

Listen to the remainder of the recording. It provides additional

information about how the citizens of Riverside have reacted to smog.

You will hear a variety of citizens as they call in to K-CPE to express

their opinions. They feel strongly about the smog which emerges from

Los Angeles. Use the three questions on page 6 to guide you in gather-

ing information from the recording.

Ron Hill:

O.K., Dave, thanks a lot. Always good to hear from you. I'm sure

that information you gave us will help our dri)iers on their way home this

Friday and also provide them with more knowledge about smog in the South

Coast Air Basin. We'll talk to you-Monday, Dave, but 'til then, so long.

Remember out there, buckle-up for safety and keep that speed below 55.

In just three minutes we'll have the news for you. First, though,

We're going to open up our K-CPE telephone lines and take some calls from

Riverside, California. The switchboard informs me that Dave Bresbank's

report has prompted many people to call in from Riverside to give their

opinions about the way smog has affected their lives. So, we'll take the

first callers who want to make a statement on the air. If you'll try to .

keep your statements short, folks, we can get four calls on before the

news. Let's take the first caller right now:

Caller #1:

Ron, I'm a lawyer and I have a growing law practice here in the

community. It's very difficult to attract good, competent help to a

community that has a serious smog problem. If you look at the average

19

-8-

new student graduating from law school today -- and, this is true of

medicine and of other forms of industry in the community -- if you

look at the bright young person who's about to start his career, and

give that person a choice of going to San Francisco, San Diego, Santa'

Barbara or Riverside, invariably he doesn't choose Riverside.

It isn't Riverside -- per se -- it's because he doesn't want to

subject himself to starting a career in a place that is already suffering

environmentally. They come here and see that, and they don't want to

stay. In many instances the ones who do come now, we find, are largely

those who have some other reason for being here: there's a long-existing

family tie that brings them back, or they're married to someone who has

a family here, or the family business is here, something like that. So,

it has had an effect on the business community, not only on my own practice,

where I've had trouble finding competent new lawyers to come here, but

other law firms have experienced that, medical firms here have experienced

that difficulty and I'm sure industry has, too.

Periodically, you'll see articles in the paper where industry indicates

that they're having trouble attracting executives or they're leaving

because of the pollution or that sort of thing.

Ron Hill:

Thank you, sir. Let's take another call. Could we keep 'em a little

shorter, folks?

-9-

Caller #2:

Good afternoon, Ron. There're many factories that would locate in

Riverside because it really is an ideal location and there are many

selling points that would be persuasive, but because of the smog, they

have stayed away. Now these are the type of plants that Riverside

traditionally has solicited, the small, clean manufacturing plants that

emit no smog of their own or that manufacture electronic components.

Many of these companies are closing up or not coming in at all.

Ron Hill:

Thanks, Mr. Remember out there, these comments are the personal

opinions of .ne callers and do not necessarily represent the opinions of

K-CPE. Another call?

Caller #3:

Ron, they say industry is coming in, and I ion't think that industry

should be penalized as hard as it is being penalized now. We have some

big industries here in Riverside that hire a lot of people, but they have

such a big burden on them that I just don't feel that they are polluting

enough to be penalized so high. Yet, some people who are working under

the federal government, I call them professional welfare recipients, are

always hollering and don't realize that if that pla.nt shuts off, they're

going to fire two or three thousand people. Those are the ones that I

get irritated with because they don't realize what the heck happens!

-10-

Ron Hill:

Thanks for calling. We've only got time for one more. Go ahead,

ma'am.

Caller #4:

I tell my children to go out and play in the rain and the wind. When

it's windy here, it's beautiful. In the summer, I bring them in. I'm

usually anti-TV, but many times in the summer our smoggiest time is

probably from one or two o'clock untilseven o'clock, which is usually

the time that children should be swimming, out playing or jump-roping.

But I bring my children in in the summer and ask them to play quietly in

the living room. And I have friends that do the same thing. I don't know,

maybe it'S not healthy for them psychologically, except I feel that I'm

probably protecting their lungs.

I've heard a person who was running for political office tell us

that he talked to a group of physicians in L.A.. He said that any child

living in this area from the age of one to ten would have irreparable lung

damage and would be a candidate for emphysema by the time they're 30. If

this is a true statistic, any parent aware of this would have to protect

his child. I feel sorry for the people in Riverside who don't have air-

conditioning, because they are very susceptible. The only way tb cool

their houses is to leave the windows open. Not everyone can afford to

have air-conditioning. As I said, when we were little, no one had it,

it was unheard of, and we didn't mind the summers, they were very pleasant.

Ron Hill:

There you have it, folks. That's what people in Riverside think of

smog. How about YOU??

Below you will find columns just like those you filled in.on page 6.

Having read some citizen reaction to smog in the South Coast Air Basin,

list any new information you have gathered beneath the columns below.

Where does thesmog come from?

What causes thesmog?

What effect doesthe smog have on

people?

2.

3.

4.

5.

-12-

Ten Years Back

The City of Riverside is located 50 miles east of Los Angeles.

With a population of nearly 132,000 in 1965, the city was the largest

community in Riverside County and served as the headquarters for county

government. Many people in the county lived in Riverside and Palm Springs,

a resort-retirement community located on the edge of the desert in the

eastern part of the county. Most of the county's remaining 406,000

residents lived in semi-rural agricultural communities.

In the middle 1960's many citizens of Riverside thought of it as a

small town where the pace of life was slow and people were friendly to

strangers. Even though Los Angeles was only an hour's drive, no direct

freeways connected the two cities. Riversiders thought of themselves as

independent of "the whole L.A. mess." Although smog had become a

bothersome nuisance, few residents of Riverside showed signs of doing

much about it.

In 1964, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors had even voted to

withdraw from a state program whiCh required that autos be equipped with

smog devices. The Riverside Press-Enterprise, the county's largest

newspaper, received numerous letters from readers commending the

Supervisors on their stand againSt the state motor vehicle smog program.

Ben Lewis succeeded E. V. Dales as Mayor of Riverside in 1965. Dales, 87,

had seldom expressed any opinion on city issues, almost never spoke at

official Council meetings and did not attend Council strategy sessions.

-13-

In contrast, Lewis was a native of Riverside, a past president of the

local Chamber of Commerce and board chairman of an insurance company.

Winning a landslide election, Lewis emphasized the city's water needs as

well as necessary efforts to attract industrial development to the city.

Neither Lewis nor any of the other candidates made any references to air

pollution during the campaign.

The citizens of Riverside adopted a ward system of representation

in 1963. The mayor became the only official elected at large from all

seven wards. The City Charter gave the mayor a voice in all City Council

proceedings, but the City Manager, John Wentz, handled the day-to-day

municipal operations. As a career-oriented city manager, Wentz took

pride in the professionally competent way he ran the city. Because the

City Council reviewed his contract from time-to-time, he sought to avoid

antagonizing its members.

First Ward representative, Harold Backstrand, heavily influenced

the City Council at this time. Backstrand, who began his fourth, four-

year council term in 1963, had more seniority than any other council

member. He was a local stockbroker, a trustee of a prestigous local

private college and politically conservative. While a council member,

Backstrand used his political leverage to oppose federal involvement at

the city level. For example, he went so far as to deny the need for a

study of the city's deteriorating downtown area because he feared such

studies would lead to a federally financed urban renewal project.

25

-14-

By the mid 1960's the University of California at Riverside had

become a major Riverside employer and began to exert some influence on

local politics, especially through moderate student activism on behalf

of civil rights and open housing. The University also became a center

for state-wide air pollution research and began programs in environmental

training.

In October, 1966, the State Supreme Court issued an injunction

blocking the $100 a month increase in City Council expense accounts until

a taxpayers' suit against the Council payments was decided. The pay issue

and urban redevelopment became the two biggest issues in the April 1967

City Council elections. Candidates for council seats were nearly unanimous

in saying that council members should receive no compensation and should

consider their positions a community service. Candidates also supported

the idea of revitalizing the city's downtown and protecting the remaining

orange groves within the city, but were not specific about how they would

accomplish their goals. Most citizens doubted that a general growth plan,

then being prepared by an outside consulting firm, would be followed by

the City Council given their past record of reversing Planning Commission

decisions.

A pre-election editorial in the Press-Enterprise called for the

complete overhaul of the City Council which the newspaper criticized for

"not having shown a grain of leadership." The newspaper went on to say,

"Where civic progress has been made, it has come only as a result of, and

reaction to, substantial citizen pressure." The normally moderate tone

-15-

of the Press-Enterprise was forgotten in the closing days of the campaign

when it described an incumbent Council member as having all "the short-

comings 4;hich are so characteristic of this City Council -- deficiences

cf judgment, purpose and ability."

In the five council elections, only the Fifth Ward incumbent, Betz,

was re-elected. Backstrand was replaced by a less conservative person,

Wayne Holcomb. Art Pick, an investment manager, defeated the Third Ward

incumbent. A high school civics teacher and former planning commissioner,

Norton Younglove was elected in the Fourth Ward. A surgeon, Dr. Hiriam

Belding, replaced the Fifth Ward incumbent and the Seventh Ward incumbent,

Bruce Betz, was retained. A feud between the Press-Enterprise and Betz

was not calmed when the newspaper insinuated that Betz was re-elected

only because his opponent was even less qualified to sit on the City

Council.

A mail survey of one hundred prominent Riversiders was conducted by

the Press-Enterprise around the time of the City Council elections.

Specifically, the questionnaire asked respondents how they thought the

switch from at-large council erections to ward elections had changed the

influence of various groups on city government. Most respondents were

members of the upper class community in Riverside. Four neighborhood

retail merchant groups as well as builders and citrus farmers were named

from the business community.

27

-16-

1967

Has the Ward System Resulted in More or Less Influence?

Influence: MOre About the Same Less

Minority Groups 47 27 10.

Arlington Area Business 35 33 8Small Businessmen 9 50 16Downtown Area Business 26 32 18Magnolia Center Business 17 50 8Youth Groups 2u 39 11

Citrus, Victoria Avenue 11 32 37Builders 31 38 8Cultural Groups 16 36 26Average Citizens 16 36 26Homeowners 12 37 27

Not surprisingly, the same influence patterns were reflected on the

new City Council. Ward One's representative was Holcomb, an executive

for a local savings and loan company. Ward Two, which contained the

University and many of the city's minority residents, was represented by

John Sotelo, a service station operator of Mexican-American background.

Ward Three was represented by Art Pick, an investment manager. Ward Four

was represented by Norton Younglove, a high school civics teacher and

. former planning commissioner. Ward Five was represented by Dr. Belding,

a successful surgeon who had previously chaired the Chamber of Commerce

Committee on Air Pollution. Ward Six's councilman was Mr. Renk, a local

businessman and a former president of the Arlington area Chamber of.

Commerce. Lastly, Ward Seven was represented by.Bruce Betz, an insurance

salesman and active Chamber of Commerce member.

-17-

At about the same time as the City Council elections, the County

Board of Supervisors was adopting an anti-smog law that would halt

olitside burning in the county over a three-year pet,?j,od. The burning ban

was opposed by the County's agricultural interests. A week after the

burning ban was approved, a County Supervisor, representing a portion of

Riverside City, reversed his vote and came out in opposition to the new

ordinance. Citizen attitudes were still not firmly in support of pollution

controls and the Press-Enterprise coverage of pollution problems remained

meager.

Two years after Watts, Riverside had its own long summer. In addition

to being the hottest and smoggiest August in three years, numerous local

businesses were fire bombed. A summer program to employ the city's out-

of-school youth was spearheaded by Mayor Lewis. The job program, along

with the arrests of several suspected arsonists, brought the summer to a

peaceful close.

In February 1968, a state-wide meeting on conservation was held in

Palm Springs. An air pollution researcher from the University of

California, Riverside, read a paper on the harmful effects of smog on

trees in the San Bernardino National Forest. One conference participant

summed up the feelings of those attending the meeting, saying, "We can

anticipate the public becoming more air-quality minded."

While Ben Lewis had been a more active mayor than the man he succeeded,

he had not yet begun to work closely with the City Council. In June 1968,

Lewis was elected to an advisory council board of the U. S. Conference of

29

-18-

Mayors. As an advisory board member, he was often called upon to travel

outside Riverside to attend hearings on various municipal issues. Through

his advisory board position, Lewis finally had some tangible duties and

a means of representing Riverside, even if it meant being absent from 'f..,e

city.

By the summer of 1968, air pollution was a recognized problem that

no one had time for. The County Board of Supervisors, divided between

urban and rural interests, looked to the LDS Angeles Board of Supervisors

for leadership, but it was not forthcoming. The Riverside City Council,

made up primarily of local businessmen, and the Mayor, both sought to

attract industry and growth to the city. In doing so, they attempted to

emphasize the many positive aspects of Riverside and to play down the

negative aspects, namely air pollution. The U. C. campus at Riverside

had the expertise to describe the problem, but not the political means of

solving it. In 1968 the dovish Press-Enterprise was involved in reporting .

the local effects of the Vietnam War and gave smog problems little attention.

Clearly, if anyone was to act on the problem of pollution, they would have

to come from outside the indentifiable Riverside political spectrum.

Answer the following questions in the spaces provided below. After

you answer all of the questions, write two or three sentences which describe

the political systems of Riverside.

1. Who are the political actors in Riverside?

-19-

2. Name one resource used by each actor.

3. Name one activity in which each actor is engaged.

4. Who makes most of the decisions for the system of Riverside?

5. How do people participate in political life in Riverside?

6. In the space below draw a diagram which shows the relationship

between the political actors in'the system of Riverside.

31

-20-

7. Write two or three sentences which describe the system of

Riverside as it existed in 1968.

You have described many of the characteristics of the political system

of Riverside, California. As the case on pages 12 to 18 suggested, prior

to 1968, Riverside was a community in which most decisions were made by

the mayor, the city manager, the city council, and the county board of

supervisors. They were the recognized leaders of the community and, as

such, made most of the important decisions for it. These leadership

positions were gained through the el(.1ctoral process or, as in the case of

the city manager, by appointment of elected officials.

These men and women controlled the amount of information available

to the public. For example, one county offic?x, Clifton Seymour, the

Air Pollution Control Officer, kept records u; the pollutants emitted by

local industry. He used this information to frmulate Riverside county

policy toward the regulation of air pollution standards. This information

was not available to the public and even Mr. Seymour's superiors, the

County supervisors, had difficulty obtaining it. Therefore, decisions

about pollution standards in Riverside County were made only by those few

32

-21-

people with access to the necessary information. The public rarely

became involved in such decisions. Even tf citizens wanted to participate

in such decisions, their lack of organization prevented them from doing

so. Other than such traditional service clubs such as the Kiwanis Club and

the Lions Club, no groups existed with pollution control as

their main purpose. The lack of such organizations was thus a stumbling

block for many citizens who wished to participate in the political life

of their community. Air pollution represented a growing problem for the

Riverside community and they appeared poorly organized to effectively

confront it.

<ss

-22-

Political Environment

4tozOff,

11A1.4p).044, 414.4.%

Mt-44 4

AIR RACS ESOURCES

Riversiders grew anxious about the smog blanketing their city. The

whole issue was made extremely complex by various individuals, groups, laws,

and agencies. The following interview shows just how difficult it was to

know who had responsibility for cleaning up the smog. As one resident

put it, "knowing *Riverside is one thing. I've lived here all my life.

But to be an effective citizen, you've got to know the county, the state,'

and a dozen other agencies."

11

-23-

As you read the following 1971 interview with Mary Kiley, try to

identify the problems which she points to. Who else became involved in

the air-quality issue in the South Coast Air Basin? What was the potential

of each for effecting Riverside?

Interviewer:

How did smog become a problem?

Mary Kiley:

From cars. No doubt, cars. You have to realize that California took

early responsibility for the type of transportation it would have within

its borders. We have one of the best freeway systems in this country.

The freeways make it possible for the citizens of the state to fully enjoy

its natural beauty. For example, in southern California, the mountains

lie only an hour's drive from Los Angeles. Travel from the mountains to

the icean for an afternoon at the beach is usually no more than one hour's

drive. The natural beauty of the California countryside and the freeways

which provide easy access to it, lure many Californians into their cars.

Any Californian will tell you that an hour's drive to a rock concert is

"nothing."

Interviewer:

Where did the money come from to build the freeway system which

criss-crosses the state?

35,

-24-

Mary Kiley:

The state received monies from the federal government to build

highways but it also possessed a unique way by which to secure additional

funds to build and to maintain highways. In 1938 the state legislature

amended the constitution of the state with Article XXVI. This article

committed state revenue, gained from the sale of fuel and from the sale

of operators' licenses within the state, to the development of a highway

system. In 1970, this law produced over 800 million dollars devoted to

the construction of highways. No wonder the state has such a tremendous

system of freeways! (The text of Article XXVI appears below.)

CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAArticle XXVI

Motor Vehicle Taxation and Revenues, Section 1, paragraph 9 (a)

From and after the effective date of this article, allmoneys collected from any tax now or hereafter imposedby the State upon the manufacture, sale, distribution,and use of motor vehicle fuel, for use in motor vehiclesupon the public streets and highways over and above thecosts of collection, and any refunds authorized by lawshall be used exclusively and directly for highwaypurposes . .

The automobile is responsible for the production of the vast majority

of air pollution in the South Coast Air Basin. All these freeways just

encourage citizens to drive, producing more revenue from the "gas tax,"

providing more money for the construction of new freeways. Of course,

this process results in more smog as more people in more cars set out on

the roads of California. In the end, the worst smog areas in the state,

such as Riverside, suffer most seriously.

-25-

Interviewer:

What can be done about the constitution?

Mary Kiley:

Well, in 1970 the California State Legislature voted to place on the

November ballot a constitutional amendment. They called it Proposition

18 and also the "clean air" amendment. It allowed up to 25% of the money

collected from the "gas tax" revenues to be used for local public trans-

portation needs. If their citizens approved, counties could designate

such money for local use. Also, Proposition 18 would allow the state to

use some of this money for "the control of environmental pollution caused

by motor vehicles." The "clean air" amendment received support from

candidates running for many state offices in November of 1970 including

the two candidates for governor. It also-received wide support from

citizens' groups such as the League of Women Voters, the League of

California Cities, the Clean Air Council, the Roadside Council, the

Association of Publicly Owned Transit Systems, the Sierra Club, the

Jaycees, the California Association of Life Underwriters, the California

Medical Association, the Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases Association

and from every major newspaper in the state except The Oakland Tribune.

Governor Reagan even supported Proposition 18. He said that it gave the

citizens of California the right to decide what kind of transportation

system they wanted. The supporters of Proposition 18 spent something like

$22,000 to buy radio time, billboards, and to distribute additional information

backing their cause. It looked for awhile like the constitution would be

amended.

37

-26-

The opposition was strong and well-organized. They felt that the gas

tax revenues should remain devoted entirely to the freeway system in the

state. Known as the "highway lobby" this coalition included the automobile

clubs, several oil companies, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters,

the California Trucking Association, as well as several construction

companies. In contrast to the supporters of the "clean air" amendment,

the Highway Lobby spent over $330,000 in an effort to defeat Proposition

18. Not surprisingly, the biggest contributors were the oil companies.

Four of them became very involved -- Standard Oil, Shell Oil, Texaco Oil

and Union Oil. The more highways we have here, the more cars there are,

and the more gas they sell. They're incredibly powerful!

Much of their money was spent on billboard space through which the

highway lobby had its largest impact. Due to these expenditures and the

failure of the supporters to adequately explain Proposition 18 to the

voters, it was defeated on November 3, by a vote of 3 to 2.

Interviewer:

HoW else is the state involved in this issue?

Mary Kiley:

Well, in 1947 the state legislature created Air Pollution Control

Districts (APCD) throughout the state of California. Each county was

given the authority to create an agency responsible for any air pollution

problem which existed within the borders of the county. The County Board

of Supervisors was the body responsible for establishing this agency. They

-27-

also served as the governing board of the Air Pollution Control. District.

For example, in Riverside County, our supervisors also serve as the Board

of the Riverside APCD and have the responsibility for running the agency.

In 1967, the Mulford-Carrell Air Resources Act created the California

Air Resources Board. The act said it was necessary to provide a means for

an intensive coordinated state, regional, and local effort to combat the

problems of air pollution. The Board members appointed by and responsible

to the governor, have the responsibility to see that all vehicles have the

proper pollution control devices on them. You know, the junk that cuts

down mileage. I take it off my car. Anyway, the Board serves to coordinate

activity between the local APCD's and the state of California. (See text

of the Mulford-Carrell Act below.)

MULFORD-CARRELL ACTProgram to Implement Air Pollution Control Plan

On or before January 1, 1972, each county district . . . shall

submit to the board a program to implement the air pollutioncontrol plan . . . within that county district. If the boardfinds the program will not achieve the air-quality standardsestablished for the basin, or if no program is submitted withinthe time specified within this section, the board may exercisethe powers of the air pollution control district . . .

Think about the questions at the beginning of the unit. Answer them

again based upon the information thus far presented in this interview.,

1. How might you account for the smog problem?

33 ,

-28-

2. What actions could citizens in Riverside take to combat the smog?

3. Whose help would be crucial to obtain?

After you have responded to these questions, read the remainder of

the interview.

Interviewer:

What about the federal government? Has it become involved?

Mary Kiley:

Yes. The Clean Air Act was enacted on December 17, 1963 by the United

States Congress It had the following purposes:

(1) to protect the nation's air resources so as to

promote the public health of Americans;

(2) to start a national research program for the

control of air pollution;

(3) to provide technical and financial assistance

to state and local governments as they develop

their own air pollution control programs;

(4) to foster the development of regional air

pollution control programs.

-29-

The Clean Air Act was amended in'1965, 1966 and 1967. In general,

these amendments authorized the department of Health, Education and

Welfare to award a variety of planning grants for creating local air

pollution control programs. In 1970 and 1974 the Act was further

amended. The 1970 amendment gave the Act new asperts crucial to the

citizens of Riverside. While earlier versions of the Act provided

federal assistance to local areas on the request of any governor, the

1970 Act placed a legal obligation on the federal government. If a

state did not develop and implement an adequate plan to control air

pollution within its borders, the Administrator of the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) became obliged to develop a plan for the state.

(See text from the Clean Air Act below.) With this activity at the

county, state and national levels, we people in Riverside have now begun

to think we have help to fight the smog.

CLEAN AIR ACTSection 110, Paragraph 4 (b)

The Administrator shall, after consideration Of any state(air pollution control plan) promptly prepare and publishproposed regulations setting forth an implementation plan ...for a state if:

1. The state fails to submit an implementation plan forany ... air quality ... standard ...

2. The plan ... submitted for such a state is determinedby the administrator not to be in accordance with therequirements of this section, or

3. The state fails, within 60 days after notification bythe administrator or such longer period as he mayprescribe, to revise an implementation plan as required ...

41

-30-

How does the information in the interview help you answer the

questions on pages 1 and 27?

The remaining three activities focus on the citizens of Riverside

and their efforts to bring clean air to their community. The information

you have already studied describes the system of Riverside throughout the

1960's. The actions taken by many actors in the system after this time

brought about several changes in the system. As the interview with Mary

Kiley illustrates, many things occurred outside the system of Riverside

which gave people new hope in combating smog. National legislation, state

legislation and a variety of state agencies were established which never

existed before. These actions were part of the political environment

surrounding Riverside. As you will see, the political environment influenced

Riverside in several ways. Before going to Activity Two, work with a

partner and study the list below. It contains elements from the political

system of Riverside as well as elements of the political environment of

which Riverside is a part. Place an "S" beside any part of the political

system and an "E" beside any part of the political environment.

-31-

Ben Lewis

Riverside County Board of Supervisors

San Bernardino

Ronald Reagan

LAAPCO

E. V. Dales

ARB

Clean Air Act

Art Pick

'Riverside City Council

What is the difference between political system and political

environment?

Think about the political system of your school. Write a paragraph

describing the political environment in which your school exists.

43 s.

-32-

In order for, change to occur in a political system, people have to

be informed and excited about an issue, any issue. If a majority of

students is satisfied with the political life in their school, then

why should it change? If a labor union satisfies its rank and file

members that it faithfully represents them, it, too, will experience

little change. If, however, a grtup in a political system becomes

dissatisfied, its response can often result in changes for the entire

system.

The political environment within which Riverside existed created

such a situation. The variety of anti-pollution legislation at the local,

state, and national levels gave credibility to those people opposed to

smog. It provided support which they needed to make smog a legitimate issue.

For the first time, River'Side could now point to a Clean Air Act aS they

agreed that smog was indeed a serious problem. They could point to a

variety of agencies throughout the state, all of which were created to

fight pollution. This political environment made smog a legitimate issue

in Riverside.

TOMORROW Is sATuRpAY !GETTING AWAY FROM THIS

CONCRETE JUNGLE WITH n- 'SCRAMPED QuARTERS AND 11.5

ARTIFICIAL ATMOSPHEREOUT To THE NIfriTuRALBEAUTY OF THE OCEAN !

INEx7DIY.!

a;)DADDY, WILL YoU TURN UP

THE AIR CoNDITIoNER ?

-33-'

Most aspects of the political environment were external to the

system of Riverside. Often, however, many aspects of a political

environment can exist within a political system. The following case

Illustrates this point. As you read it identify:

1) the political system which it focuses upon;

2) the aspects of the political environment within thesystem.

BIG MONEY, BIG PROBLEMS

'The centerpiece of American democracy is our

process of electing men and women to public office.

That process is now the subject of a spirited

national debate. From the Congress, from election

analysts and most importantly from the people

themselves have come a steady stream of proposals.

They are varied in nature but unified in purpose.

All of them call for reform."

Presideht Richard M. Nixon

'The United States has the best political system

that money can buy and it is a disgrace to every

principle on which our republic stands."

Senator Edward M. Kennedy

Until April 7, 1972, candidates for federal office in the United

States rarely disclosed the amount of money received or spent as part of

campaign for office. These contributions and expenditures were considered

-34-

confidential information. While the Corrupt Practices Act of 1925

required candidates to report the money received and spent in general

elections, no such requirement existed for primary elections. Candidates

who wanted to avoid disclosure of their contributions simply collected

most of them before the primary election. Therefore, the law did not

require them to disclose the majority of the sources of their contributions.

The rising cost of television commercials, newspaper advertisements,

airplane travel and other campaign activities, dramatically increased

the cost of running for public office in the United States. Today,

candidates often borrow huge sums of money to pay these expenses. After

the 1968 elections, the Democratic party was over five million dollars

in debt from money borrowed to finance campaigns. As the costs of running

for office have increased, so have the size of contributions to candidates

given by some individuals and corporations. An investigation of contributions

to Richard Nixon's 1972 re-election campaign revealed huge donations.

Selected Contributors to President Nixon's1972 Re-election Campaign

W. Clement Stone $2,000,000.Richard M. Scaife $1,000,000.

Walter Annenberg $250,000.

J. Paul Getty $75,000.

Nelson Rockefeller $50,000.

Bob Hope $50,000.

Even before Nixon's campaign, many Americans felt that the high cost

of running for office gave a great deal of influence to individuals able

to make sizeable campaign contributions. Critics charged that office

holders would always feel a special obligation to those who gave

generously td their election campaigns.

-35-

Donations to 1968 campaigns for federal offices, though far

smaller than the 1972 contributions, occasionally exceeded $100,000.

Im 1970 a coalition of citizen groups and legislators pushed for

legislation to limit both campaign contributions and expenditures.

They argued that without such limits, a few rich individuals with the

ability to make large campaign contributions could influence the actions

of many office holders. This coalition wanted a law which also required

candidates to report their contributions and expenditures involved in both

primary and general elections. In 1970, both the Senate and the House of

Representatives passed a bill limiting the amount of money candidates

for national and high state offices could spend on radio and television

advertisement. The bill arrived at the White House for President Nixon's

signature the week of December 1. He vetoed it, claiming that the

country needed a bill going beyond the control of spending for radio and

television. Outraged, the Senate Democrats tried to gather support to

override the President's veto. They failed.

Pressure for a campaign reform bill continued. A Gallop poll taken

at the time, revealed that 8 of 10 Americans favored a bill to limit

campaign spending. Throughout 1971 most Democrats and some Republicans

worked in support of such legislation. They were supported by a variety

of interested citizen groups including Common Cause, the National

Committee for an Effective Congress, and the Public Affairs Council. On

February 7, 1972 another campaign reform bill was on Nixon's desk for his

signature. The President signed the Federal Election Campaign Act into

law. This law required the full reporting of sources and use of all

47

-.36-

campaign funds. It also drastically limited spending. In signing

the bill the President said,

by giving the American public full access to

the facts of political financing, this

legislation will guard against campaign

abuses and will work to build public confidence

in the integrity of the electoral process."

The bill gave responsibility for monitoring campaign spending to

three government agencies, the General Accounting Office, the Clerk of

the House and the Clerk of the Senate. Many people, though, doubted

that these three government agencies could honestly police campaign

spending. So, citizen groups began their own monitoring.

The Watergate scandal demonstrated that law or no law, huge sums

of money were still being contributed to political campaigns. Many

corporations and individuals were fined for giving too much money to

the Nixon Campaign. The Committee to Re-elect the President also came

under attack for failure to disclose all sources of the contributions

it received. An angry public called out for even tighter controls on

campaign contribution and spending.

The Senate and the House spent much of 1974 drafting a new law

for this purpose. A Senate bill called for the public financing of

congressional and Presidential elections. It suggested that citizens

earmark one dollar on their federal income tax form for use in national

elections. Candidates for national office would obtain money from the

U. S. Treasury which would collect it with income taxes. The amount of

-37--

money cardidates received would depend upon the number of people they

represented. Therefore, Presidential candidates had access to more

money than Senatorial candidates who had access to more money than

House candidates: The bill limited gifts to Presidential candidates to

$1,000 or less, suggesting that their public financing plan would account

for additional money needed by candidates.

The House drafted a bill with a major difference. Their bill

restricted public financing of national campaigns to Presidential and

Senatorial elections. Many Representatives came from small districts

and represented relatively few people. They reasoned that public

fihancing of their campaigns would not possibly allow them enough money

to run an effective campaign.

In September, 1974, the. Senate and the House conferred about this

difference in the two bills. Knowing that the House would not pass its

bill, the Senate deleted the section on public financing of House

campaigns. The compromise bill passed overwhelmingly in the Senate and

the House., On October 15, President Ford signed the Campaign Finances

Act into law. The public financing of Presidential campaigns will begin

in 1976. It restricts the size of contributions to a Presidential

candidate to $1,000. It outlaws cash gifts of more than $100 and it

creates a strong independent election commission to enforce the new law.

The Campaign Reform Act received almost no opposition. While many

individuals expressed doubts about the specific law, no effective coalition

formed to fight its passage. Before 1968 few Americans expressed concern

49

-38-

at the way in which campaigns for national office are financed. The

passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act and the Campaign Reform

Act illustrates the importance which many Americans now place on

restricting the use of money in federal political campaigns.

1. What changes has the United States experienced according to this case?

2. List five aspects of the political environment mentioned in this case.

3. How does political environment affect change?

-39-

ACTIVITY TWO: CLEAN AIR NOW

LEARN HOW YOU CAN FIGHT SMOGJoin CLEAN AIR NOW (C.A.N.)

(A Citizen Group to Fight Air Pollution)

[ I Please Send Me Information on C.A.N.

[ I I want to Join and Support CA.N.

STUDENT ( 1 $2.00 GENERAL ( $5.00 SUSTAINING ( $50.00

SPONSOR ( ) $250.00 DONATION (

CLEAN AIR NOWP.O. Box 5682,' Riverside, California 92507P.O. Box 5811, San Bernardino, California 92408

LAST NAME FIRST TEL.

STREET CITY ZIP

(reprinted from CANClean Air News, bypermission)

The political environment had made smog* a legitimate issue in

Riverside. But the air kept getting worse. If anything was going to

improve the air, the system itself needed to change. People needed

information about how smog might restrict their daily activity, how it

might affect the operation of businesses and how it could affect the

scheduling of sporting events. If people in Riverside could be educated

about air pollution, they might become concerned. But concern would not

clean up the air. In addition to education, about the issue of air

*Smog is produced by a chemical reaction when hydrocarbons (gasolinevapors) and oxides of nitrogen (which are present in the air), are mixedin the presence of sunlight, producing a group of compounds called oxidants.

c5 k

-40-

CITIZENS "DO CARE ABOUT

THE AIR IN RIVERSIDE

I'VE WRITTEN LETTERSTo THE PAPERS

WE'VE DONATED t-oTSof MONEY TO Wt1210)5ENVIRONMENTAL GlaouPS.

ELECT THOSE cANDiDATESWHO ARE CONCERNED

ABOUT OUR AM I

52

-41-

pollution, people needed to know how they could participate to help stamp

out smog. People who were frustrated and upset about the presence of

filthy air in their community needed to organize. If they had an

organization through which to work, they might more effectively express

their views.

This activity focuses on the concept of political mobilization and

how it affects change. Mobilization is the process by which people are

organized to work toward a common _goal. Mobilization usually involves

a group or an organization formed by strong leaders who have a variety

of political resources. Once formed, such a group attracts new members

who, in turn, make the group more effective. The activity contains data

about mobilization in Riverside. It describes the formation of a group

to fight smog. Also, it suggests how well the group succeeded in

solidifying support for the cause of clean air.

Throughout the 1960's, neither the city nor the state took decisive

action to control smog. Yet, devices designed to measure the amount of

smog in the air revealed that smog became more and more harmful each year.

Once smog affected Riverside for only two months out of the year. By

1968, however, smog could be seen and felt in Riverside throughout the

entire summer, a period of four months!

The summer months were particularly affected because of the frequent

inversion layers which settled over the city. An inversion layer is a

blanket of warm air settling low over the city preventing the cooler,.

53

-42-

I'M STODYING ABOUTAIR poLLUTANTS!

I'VE WRITTENTHE ENVIRON -

MENTAL ?Rol-K-T% oN AGENCY)AND RECEvEDONLY ASSURANC E

TItfitT TREY ARC

'5TuIVING THEprzosLE-mi

BEUE VE ITWOULD I+ELP IFMORE PEOPLESIMPLY TOOKTHE 13u5

I'VE TAKEN SOME Plie-"TOSTO 51kOW MY FRAENDS 1.

-43-

more polluted air from rising upward. Usually the pollution produced by

cars and stationary sources, such as industry, gets absorbed into the

environment. It becomes diluted by rising upward or by occasional wind

and rain, The high pressure systems and easterly breezes accompanying

the summer months often create inversion layers which, combined with the

mountains rimming Riverside, prevent the escape of the smog. At times

such as these, pollutants reach critical levels.

By 1970, the California Department of Agriculture estimated that smo'g

caused as much as $20 million dollars a year in citrus losses in the South

Coast Air Basin. In 1968, state-wide crop losses due to smog were

estimated at $248 million dollars. Smog became associated with damage

to spinach, lettuce, flowers, carrots, beets, tomatoes and beans. In

addition to its effect on plants, smog caused the tarnishing of metal, the

discoloration of stone and brick, the fading,of dyes and the deterioration

of rubber goods.

The University of California at Riverside, as well as other groups,

began widespread research on the effects of smog on humans. They pointed

out the difficulty of breathing associated with smog and the resultant

increased possibility of contracting respiratory disease. Many people

reported that smog caused tears to form in their eyes and also caused

serious headaches.

Concerned about their city, individual citizens began to meet to

share their concerns over its future. Most of the individuals who took

part in these meetings were influential members of the community. The

-44-

WERE USINGCAR POOL !!)

I THINK StkoULD'DEVOTE MORE ENERGY1-0wARD OEvELop1NGPoo. uT 10 N- a'EE cA,R!

WAS So CONCERNEDABOUT THE SMOG t N

RIVERSIDE THAT I TOOKACTION MovED

56

I

I'VE CALLED TO A.P.CD.AT LEAST FIFTY -TAMES'.

"")

I'VE 13EEN ATTENDING

crry couNcu. MEETINGSTO HEAR 'Fog MYSEL -FWHA-715 BEiNG DONE .(

*IA 'au----/,°°

-45-

groups included lawyers, doctors, bankers, research scientists and

others. On July 29, 1969, 25 of these citizens organized as a

corporation under California law. As its primary purpose, the group

wished to eliminate smog by any and all legal means. Calling itself

Clean Air Now, the group served the citizens of Riverside and San

Bernardino counties. Don L. Bauer was elected the first president of

CAN at an official board meeting on Wednesday, October 29, 1969.

CAN immediately set out to inform the citizens of San Bernardino

and Riverside about the problem of smog in the area. Though the group

was young, its members were all experienced community leaders and they

possessed a variety of political resources.

CAN established a nine person Board of Directors for the organization.

Each year the members elect three new board members to replace three

retiring members. The new board then elects the officers. In addition

to the Board of Directors and the officers, CAN also established thirteen

standing committees to help with the day-to-day business. The thirteen

committees focused on the following areas.

1. Medical

2. Ecological

3. Technical

4. Legal

5. Community Relations

6. Industrial Relations

7. Government Relations

57

-46-

ALL OF THOSE ACTIVITIES AREFINE! BuT COULDN'T WF DOMORE GOOD IF WE ORGANIZEDA CATIZEINCS ANTI -SMOG GROUP?

YEAH! 10SMW RowWE FEEL/

wilalmIwwwwwwwwwlegrprir

REMEMBER- `THERE 15STRENGTH IN NUMBERS !!!

58:

a

-47-

8. Finance

9. Membership

10. Public Relations

11. Speaker's Bureau

12. Newsletter Editor

13. Organization Coordinator

What activities could CAN provide which would focus attention on

the issue of smog in Riverside?

Your teacher will now divide you into small groups. Each group will

receive a data packet. It contains: (1) several role profiles of the

founders and leaders of CAN; (2) three of the first newsletters printed

by the organization; (3) a diary entry by the President of CAN; (4) a

newspaper article and letter to the editor from the Riverside Press-

Enterprise describing the activities of CAN. The material in the data

packets is reprinted in the text on pages 48 through 68 . Study this

information carefully. After you have finished with the material, each

member of the group should fill out an individual worksheet.

wi:Itn=raimaxprf,4:PT n 112212M:7,

High School Students in Riverside Protest Smog

59'

44-0 VIr-C S-O

.r- S-U" CL)V) 4-,r-E wWCL

(1.)-.C] CL

"G!CL) -C)

4-3 r-Cr-S-CL >

.1

CC

-48-

1. FOUNDERS AND LEADERS OF CAN

Don Bauer -- First CAN President

Don was elected first president of Clean Air Now on October 29, 1969.

At that time, Don was serving as Dean of Student. a'. a local university.

He had become quite knowledgeable about the subject of smog through an

intensive study of the subject.

He is a seventh-day Adventist minister who works mostly with young

adults. He is a highly respected member of Riverside.

Oon Zimmer -- First CAN Vice-President

Don Zimmer was elected first Vice-President of CAN on October 29, 1969.

Don is an attorney working with a Riverside, California law firm. He

is identified with many civic groups in Riverside, among them the Uptown

Kiwanis Club.

Don was instrumental in the formation of CAN and is a member of CAN's

Board of Directors. He also serves as legal consultant to CAN. His

knowledge of the lay is helpful in determining how state and federal

legislation might affect Riverside.

John A. Palladino -- First Chairman Government Relations Committee

John A. Palladino is an attorney who has practiced in Riverside for

over 15 years. After working for the Riverside County Public Defender's

Office for three years, John resigned to become involved in private law

practice. He has a special interest in zoning and planning and has

organized citizen groups to fight zoning plans contrary to good zoning

practice.

60

-49-

John has worked closely with CAN since its founding. He has been a

member, a Director, and Chairman of the Government Relations Committee.

He has been active in a variety of civic organizations including the City

of Riverside General Plan, the Citizens Committee on Parks and Recreation,

the Riverside Civic League and the Planning and Conservation League. He

also has been a past chairman of the Riverside Chapter of the Sierra Clnb.

David D. Loge -- Press Relations DirectorBoard of Directors

In March 1970, David became Press Relations Director for CAN. Shortly

after that he was elected to CAM's Board of Directors. During this time,

David was a business analyst in the administrative offices of San Bernardino

County. David served as Press Relations Director for his local church

and was an active member of the Chamber of Commerce in Loma Linda, a community

near Riverside.

Sharon Cordaro -- Recording Secretary/Current President

Sharon has been CAM's Recording Secretary since 1970 and is its

current President. Sharon is a teacher concerned about the effect of

smog in Riverside upon her. two children. "I decided I just couldn't live

in this area and not try to do something about our worst problem, air

pollution. CAN was formed because people were becoming more conscious of

the air pollution problem in this area."

Ann M. Hussey -- Secretary

Ann served as the first secretary of CAN. Although she moved to

Riverside in 1968, she quickly became involved in the community. As a

nurse, the health aspects of pollution have been a special concern to Ann.

61

-50-

Like many other CAN members, Ann has been very much involved in

other community organizations. She has served on the Board of the

Women's Auxiliary of the Riverside Medical Association and Chei-person

of the Environment Committee. Ann has also been active in the

Comprehensive Health Planning Association of Riverside County and she

has served as a school observer for the Riverside League of Women Voters.

Lynn McQuern - Member Board of Directors 1971-2

Lynn was elected to the Board of Directors in the fdll of 1971.

Lynn has served as a co-editor of the Clean Air News, CAN's newsletter.

He is an active newspaperman and a.member of several environmental

organizations.

Joe Doty -- Member Board of Directors 1871-2/Past President

Joe was elected-to CAN's Board of Directors in the fall of 1972.

At the time, Joe was studying political science at the University of

California in Riverside. Joe made an effort to learn as much as he could

al:161A government control of air pollution. He was a member of a local

air pollution association.

Most importantly, Joe worked to find out as much as he could about

the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District. He recently completed

a report on the activities of the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control

District.

These people are just a few of many associated with CAN. However,

they do represent the political resources which most members brought to the

group.

-51-

2. From CAN Clean Air News Volume 1, Issue No. 1, November 1969.(Reprinted by Permission)

CAN GETS CALIFORNIA TAX EXEMPTION

Organizational steps have been completed for Clean Air Now (CAN),

and it is established as a California nonprofit corporation:

CAN'S Articles of Incorporation have been filed with state and local

offices, bylaws have been adopted and the first officers of the corporation

elected.

Donald L. Bauer, of Loma Linda, was elected President of the Board;

Donald F. Zimmer, Riverside, Vice-President; Anne Hussey, Riverside,

Secretary; and'Kenneth E. Gray, Jr., San Bernardino, Treasurer.

California Franchise Tax Board has granted CAN's application for

tax exempt status as a charitable and educational organization.

Under this status, money donated to CAN is deductable from California

State Income Tax. Legal offices are now taking steps to obtain Federal

tax exempt status for the corporation.

Plans are already being formulated to develop chapters of CAN in

other areas of the two-county area and other parts of the state.

Professional assistance is being used to set up these chapters, so

that CAN may be able to accomplish its objectives in orderly, legal and

effective steps.

CAN WILL'REVIEW SMOG LAWMAKING DURING 1970

Government officials have been contacted to inform them of CAN

activities and requesting full information on all smog-control activities

and pertinent legislation.

63

-52-

The legislators are being advised that the CAN membership and the many

thousands of members of affiliated organizations, will be watching their

progress very closely in 1970.

To assess legislators as individuals, a questionnaire is being

submitted to state senators and assemblymen. Results of this survey,

as well as summaries of information obtained by the Government Relations

Committee, will be published in this newsletter.

Through furnishing comprehensive information, we hope to provide a

source of knowledge and a means of coordinating the efforts of countless

thousands of individuals in California, who, acting alone, have been

unable to bring about a legislative climate that is necessary to solve

air pollution.

For example, if a constructive bill is pending in the State

Legislature, the membership will be made aware of this.

State Senator Petris stated in Riverside, October 22, that he would

re-introduce his bill to ban the internal combustion engine by 1975 which

lost by only one vote in the Assembly Committee last year. Senator

Petris' bill will be an improved version of the last one, and assemblymen

who were influenced by the auto manufacturers' lobbyists, may be persuaded

by their constituents to support the new bill.

TAKE ACTION FOR MORE MEMBERSHIP

Memberships in CAN are increasing rapidly but many more are needed

if we are to effectively lick the problem of pollution which confronts us

all.

-53-

Membership committee through Anne Hussey asks all of you who are

already members to get at least five friends or neighbors to join the

organization. We need the support of everyone in this, as there are no

better salesmen than those of you who have already become involved.

You have been called upon in the past to help with the petition

drive and other projects and have worked splendidly on every request.

Please do so once again.

Make sure the new members mention your name so that you can be

credited accordingly.

For information on membership, or requests for membership blanks,

call 682-6424 or 683-4807 in Riverside or 877-1961 in San Bernardino.

SOMEONE OUGHT TO CONSOLIDATE ALL AIR POLLUTION GROUPS

The anti-air-pollution fight by the people of California is not well

organized.

This is evidenced by the following:

Clean Air Coordinating Committee of Livermore is circulating a

petition.

Committee for Clean Air Now, Palo Alto, is "alerting citizens."

Northern California Committee for Environmental Information, Berkeley,

has recently published a report on San Francisco Bay Area air pollution.

Citizens Against Air Pollution, San Jose, is circulating the Clean

Environment Act Petition.

Ecology Action sponsored the Berkeley "smog free locomotion day"

September 27.

65

-54--

People's Lobby, Hollywood, is near the end of its initiative petition

drive to put tighter pollution controls on the ballot.

Clean Air Council, Hollywood, is promoting an economic boycott of

General Motors.

Stamp Out Smog (SOS) in Beverly Hills, Group Against Smog Pollution

(GASP), Claremont, and numerous other groups being organized by concerned

people throughout the state, are supporting the People's Lobby initiative

petition and the Clean Air Council's boycott.

Clean Air NoW (CAN) Riverside-San Bernardino, has completed a mile-

and-one-half long petition of 125,000 signatures, requesting the

legislators to give number one priority to smog in the coming legislative

session.

Citizens of Ventura were recently instrumental, as have been the

citizens of the Barstow area, in putting road blocks in the path of new

or expanded power plants which are polluting the air.

When one group of citizens, or its organization ties all this protest

into one coordinated group, then effective laws and enforcement would more

rapidly eliminate air pollution.

From CAN Clean Air News Volume 1, Issue No. 2, March 1970(Reprinted by Permission)

PETITIONS FOR "CLEAN AIR NOW" PRESENTED TO CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

The hard work of hundreds of petition carrying advocates of Clean

Air Now came to a dramatic conclusion on the steps of California's State

-55-

Capitol on January 7, 1970 when "Petitions for Clean Air Now" a mile

and one-half in length containing 140,000 signatures were presented to

the California'State Legislature. Don Bauer, President of CAN, made

the formal presentation in the presence of a large gathering of state

officials and elected representatives. The scroll was accepted by

Lieutenant Governor Ed Reinecke, on behalf of the Governor and the

Legislature. In accepting the petitions, Reinecke promised that they

"would be considered very, very carefully," and pledged decisive action

toward the immediate,abatement of air pollution.

The text of the petitions read as follows:

We the undersigned citizens of the State of California, declare

as follows:

The pollution of our air continues year after year with no signs

that smog control programs are clearing the air. In view of the inadequacy

of present lawsto provide an immediate solution to the smog problem, we

petition our Legislators to pledge that the abatement of air pollution in

California shall be given an absolute first priority in legislative

programs and that number one priority be maintained until solutions are

found that bring results. We want nothing less than Clean Air Now!"

Thousands of these documents, bearing the signatures of Riverside -

Redlands - San Bernardino area residents, were fastened together end-to-

end and coiled upon a large scroll which was partially unrolled down the

steps of the Capitol and across the lawn, graphically illustrating the

number of persons involved in this expression of concern for our environment.

The presentation ceremony received wide news coverage at local, state and

national levels, including radio and television reporting.

67

-56-

The petition drive was c.,-sponsored by Clean Air Now and San

Bernardino Radio Station KRNO. The drive was commended in San Bernardino,

California on September 6, 1969 at an anti-smog rally attended by local,

state and national political figures and thousands of concerned citizens.

The initial goal for the drive was "a mile of signatures" which, it was

computed, would require 90,000 signatories. In just two months, 140,000

signatures were obtained, largely from the cities of Riverside, Redlands

and San Bernardino alone, and the petition exceeded a mile and one-half

in length at the time of its presentation.

The circulations of these petitions and their formal presentation

in Sacramento at the opening of the Legislative Session were designed to

underscore the critical importance of the air pollution problem and to

request immediate corrective action from our legislature. There is no

question but that the drive has helped to alert the public to the problem.

The ultimate success of this effort, however, must be measured in the

results which flow from this new public awareness. CAN's committees

are now reviewing the host of anti-pollution legislation which has been

introduced since the opening of the current session. In keeping with its

primary purpose of 'public education on the smog problem, CAN will

periodically inform the public as to the content of these proposals so

that the public may weigh their suitability to the task at hand.

Accompanying the petitions to Sacramento for the formal presentation

were CAN Board members: Don Bauer; Donald F. Zimmer, Vice-President and

Chairman of the Presentation Arrangements Committee; George Burton, M.D.;

and Jon Menand. Radio Station KRNO was represented at the presentation

GB

-57-

by its Vice-President and General Manager, H. George Carroll. Complimentary

transportation was provided to and from Sacramento by Pacific Southwest

Air Lines.

Clean Air Now extends its sincere thanks to all who worked so

diligently in circulating these petitions. That effort made the

presentation possible. Special thanks are also extended to Assemblyman

W. Craig Biddle and his staff for their assistance in the presentation

arrangements and to Senators William Coombs and Gordon Cologne, and

Assemblymen Jerry Lewis, John Quimby and Victor Veysey, for their assist-

ance and support. A vote of thanks also goes to Radio Station KRNO for

their cooperation and hard work in this effort.

FACT SHEETS

One of CAN's most effective tools in the fight of air pollution i

an informed membership.

Many months ago, recognizing this need and the fact that much

misinformation existed regarding air pollution, CAN's Board of Directors

took an important action they directed the Chairmen of several

research committee s to develop "FACT SHEETS" for distribution to the

membership and other interested persons.

References for pertinent source material are made to each air

pollution fact listed. The fact sheets are updated at six-month intervals.

Now available for the asking are the following fact sheets:

69

Effects on Plant Life

Effects on Animal Life

Effects on Human Health

The response to these information-laden sheets has been encouraging;

public schools, civic groups and many individuals have requested copies

and are "doing their bit" to spread the bad (good?) news about air

pollution.

CAN YOU USE A SPEAKER FOR CAN?

As one of the main purposes of Clean Air Now is to educate and

arouse the public about air pollution, the Speaker's Bureau fulfills a

vital function. The Bureau is made up of members of the Board of

Directors and other volunteers including:, Dr. Max Flickinger, a minister;

Mr. Don Blose, a member of Toastmasters; Mrs. Ruth Bratten; and Mr. William

C. Kennedy. These people have donated their time to disseminate infor-

mation to the public.

Speakers have addressed diverse groups including P.T.A. organizations,

service clubs,-civic clubs, conservationists, youth and church groups.

With the emphasis of President Nixon's State of the Union address

bringing environmental control to the fore, many politicians are following

suit. There is the danger that the general population may feel that

everything is being taken care of. We need to keep the issue alive until

the goal of clean air is achieved.

If you have contact with any group which could make use of our

Speaker's Bureau, please contact Mrs. Virginia Broach, 686-0243.

-52-

From CAN Clean Air News Volume 1, Issue No. 3, April 1970(Reprinted by Permission)

ANTI-POLLUTION COALITION

At a meeting in Los Angeles on March 21, 1970, anti-smog organizations.

from all over the State of California met to plan the first state-wide

coordinated effort by citizens' organizations to deal with the smog crisis.

John A. Palladino, representing "CLEAN AIR NOW," was Master of Ceremonies

and made the keynote speech for unity and cooperation outlining a plan

of organization. Phillip Berry, President of the Sierra Club, gave the

welcoming speech and introduced John Zierold, Conservation Lobbyist, who

told the audience how essential their participation was in the legislative

process if effective smog-control legislation is desired. He pointed out

that legislators are influenced, wined, and dined all year long by

professionally trained personnel with large funds at their disposal and

that frequently the most well-meaning legislator will hear only one voice

on an issue throughout the year because his constituents fail to make their

views known.

The meeting then divided into study groups concerning various types

of smog legislation and reports were made at the end of the day. It was

unanimously agreed by the more than one hundred participants that coalition

efforts should continue and tentative plans are being made to establish

a coalition office in Sacramento as well as improved methods of communi-

cation between the various groups.

71

-60-

THE BIRTH OF THE ECONOMIC BOYCOTT!!

"Many people ... have bemoaned the futility of attempting to force

industries in the United States of America into programs of benefit to

the general public if these programs involve the possibility of the

industries making less profit. It is obvious, however, that the general

public has an extremely potent weapon at its disposal if the industry

manufactures products'which are used by the general public. This is, of

course, the economic boycott."

"This kind of campaign should be very successful because it is only

necessary to convince one potential buyer out of three in order to levy

a one-billion dollar loss upon the ... industry. In addition, it does

not require extreme sacrifices on the part of a consumer." (Page 28,

Environment, Volume 12, No. 2.)

TOO DANGEROUS TO WAIT!

Consumers should demand cleaner fuels and smogless automobiles or

the manufacturer will be threatened with an economic boycott by the

general public. Adopting this method of action, one member of CAN, a

regular customer of Standard Oil Company for more than eleven years,

sent in his credit card cancelling his account with a letter explaining

that this was done because of the actions of Standard Oil Company with

regard to unleaded gasoline and the F-310 advertising campaign. This

letter of cancellation was sent to as many company executives as could

be located. At the same time, the member wrote to other oil companies

-61-

for a new credit card, advising them that this was being done because

they publicly committed themselves to the early use of unleaded

gasoline at little or no increase in cost to the consumer.

CITIZENS MUST EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS

An editorial in the Riverside Press reported that Kaiser Steel

"by virtue of its sheer size, is one of the largest industrial

contributors to the area's smog, gushing forth smoke and flames on

certain days that light up the sky northwest of Riverside and the plan

is now meant to get even bigger."

Citizens should immediately question the San Bernardino County

Supervisors with regard to whether or not this is advisable or desirable,

in view of the fact that KaiS'er Steel already has several waivers of

standard control regulations -- in effect -- "permission to pollute."

anAt the same time, since San Bernardino County Supervisors have

also opposed the use of gas tax funds for smog control the San

Bernardino Supervisors should be advised of views on that subject.

ONE LETTER IS EQUAL TO TEN THOUSAND WORDS ...

When you hesitate about writing or phoning your elected represent-

atives, keep in mind that legislators frequently invite and welcome

informed, reasoned and brief letters on any issue of concern to a

citizen. This is frequently their only means of sensing the mood of the

public. For each letter received, the legislator knows that there are

10,000 or more expressing the same viewpoint that were never written,

73

-62-

because too many citizens are too lazy or apathetic to lift a pen, even

when their life depends on it ... but that they do act when in the ballot

box.

Emotional and insulting letters are to be avoided. To be truly

effective, you must convince your representative that you are requesting

him to take a position on a specific issue and not uttering a complaint

just to -get rid of some anger. You can become informed by active

participation in all CAN activities, reading the newsletter, speaking to

your friends, and encouraging your friends to join "CLEAN AIR NOW."

Other organizations of which you may be a member should also be encouraged

to publish, in their own newsletters, pertinent information obtained

from "CLEAN AIR NEWS." This is how you can firmly demand your rights

as a citizen and voter in an effective manner.

-63-

3. Statement by Sharon Cordaro, Current President of CAN

"CAN was formed at the end of 1969 because people were becoming more

conscious of the air pollution problem in this area. Everyone always

knew that Los Angeles had a problem with air pollution, but it wasn't as

well known here until we got monitoring stations. People began to be

informed that we really had one. There's a station, in Riverside. In

fact, we have two in Riverside and one in Palm Springs and one in the

Perris area, one in Corona, one in San Bernardino, quite a few.

"We had public meetings. One of the first things they did -- I

believe they had 140,000 names on a big petition and Don Bauer, who was

President, took this petition to Sacramento. There was a big ceremony

on the Capitol steps presenting the petition to the Lieutenant Governor.

The petition says something like, "we believe that we have the right to

clean air and we want something done about it legislatively." So, that

was one that got a lot of publicity in the paper, of course. We put out

newsletters periodically and then about three years later a slide show

was developed. There were several copies of that which we still use.

This has been given to thousands of people, all kinds of groups, church

groups, Kiwanis, service clubs, and schools. We called the Speaker's

Bureau and had publicity and then the word just spreads around. We also

have pamphlets and things that we give out.

"Because we are a volunteer group, we had some problems. When you're

depending on volunteers to staff it and to do all the nitty gritty work

that has to be done to help it survive, it's tough to get started. I think

-64-

publicity is one of the main things -- getting articles in the paper about

what you are doing and then the newsletter. We have a membership campaign

on right now because we have had a membership not as large in the last

couple of years. As it was in the earlier days, this is partly because

some of our officers were pursuing legal matters and were not as active

in the local area. They were prosecuting the Los Angeles Air Pollution

Control District, so that reduced the number of people able to do things

locally, and our local membership did drop. Now, we're basically in

San Bernardino and Riverside counties, but we have members'from as far

away as Palm Springs and a number of towns within 15 miles.

"We send out renewal letters to the members each year. Now we are

revising our membership files. I have a very good membership chairman,

who is going to send a renewal letter to people at the time that their

dues are coming up.

When the Clean Air amendments passed in 1970, states were supposed

to make a plan as to how they could meet these standards, and if they

did not make a plan, then the EPA was supposed to impose a plan.

California did not come up with one. The EPA set forth this one that

included gasoline rationing among other options -- and charging a person

five dollars a day to park at their office building. Anyway, then they

had to come around and have hearings on this plan, public hearings to

see how the people reacted to this plan. Of course, thn reaction was

very adverse, because there were very radical things in there.

-65-

"I went to the hearings here in Riverside, and CAN made a statement.

Also, I made a personal statement at that meeting and many organizations

did. CAN's position at that time was that we would accept gas rationing,

and our members would, if that's what we needed to clean up the air. We

felt that that was the most important thing. If people had to ration gas,

they would be able to work it out. After all of this 'happened, though,

you get to wonder whether it was really valid, this whole business of

hearings. Now you see the EPA has recommended that Congress amend the

'77 standards, which is something we're very upset about."

-66-

4. Article and Letter from the Riverside Press-Enterprise

Anti-pollution Group Plans Effortto Publicize Smog Control Bills

From Riverside Press-Enterprise, December 23, 1971(Reprinted by Permission)

A drive to disseminate information on smog control legislation will

be launched early next year by Clean Air Now (CAN), the anti-pollution

group of about 700 citizens in the Riverside-San Bernardino area.

William Wybourn, CAN president, said efforts are now under way to

get at least $10,000 in federal money for an educational center to gather

and distribute information.

"Air pollution is not an insurmountable problem, but it will not be

solved by waiting for the other guy to do something, about it," said Wybourn.

We want to be in a position to show interested people how they can help

solve the problem."

Even though CAN's function over the past two years has been primarily

educational -- its newsletter goes to more than 2,000 persons throughout

.the state and country -- the new program will be "an even more aggressive

effort directed toward adults in an attempt to get more action that will

be felt in elections," said Wybourn.

To help get some federal money, CAN is seeking someone experienced

in writing proposals for government funds to help in an unpaid volunteer

status.

Requests for the $10,000 regarded as necessary to open the educational

center will be sent to the Environmental Protection Agency and the Depart-

ment of Health, Education and Welfare, Wybourn said.

-67-

If one agency agrees to provide the money, the second request will

be withdrawn, he explained.

Deadline for submitting the request to the environmental agency is

Jan. 15. "I don't think it will take too long for us to know the answer

after that," said Wybourn. "If they agree to fund us, we will probably

get the money by March."

He did not know the timetable for a possible federal grant, but said

a request also would be sent in as soon as possible.

Wybourn said the expanded political role of CAN doesn't mean it will

take partisan stands on issues or politicians.

"We will come up with the facts and be as research minded as possible.

We will not be supporting or opposing individuals. We plan now to put out

the facts and let people make up their own minds."

Wybourn is confident this will help in the air pollution struggle.

"If the public knows what to do, why, when and how to do it, we

believe that public apathy will become a thing of the past. And apathy

is the biggest hurdle to be overcome in the battle to clean up our air."

From Press-Enterprise, Saturday, August 23, 1969(Reprinted by Permission)

Editor, Press-Enterprise:

I would like to express my appreciation for your fine work in

bringing to light our No. 1 problem -- air pollution -- through the

recent excellent articles published in your paper.

-68-

Perhaps this is one reason for the record attendance -- standing

room only -- at the CAN meeting (Clean Air Now) which was held Aug. 12

at the Southern Calif. Gas Co.

With great interest, I watched the development and progress at

this meeting as compared to some meetings about six months ago. It

seems that the citizenry of this Inland Area is really aroused to do

something about it. They really did start, with determination, to act

upon this No. 1 problem. We should all attend these meetings and "Hark,

Hark" to what is being done here and get behind this CAN organization to

help solve this smog problem. If we do this and acquaint ourselves with

some of the work that is already started, we will learn that people are

not "just talking" ...

Estelle RussRiverside

-69-

Worksheet for Clean Air Now Data Packet

1. How many members belong to CAN?

2. What goals guide the activities of the organization?

3. What political resources do the founders and leaders have?

Name Resources

4. Give three examples of the methods used by CAN to support the fightfor clean air?

5. Would you join a group led by these people? Why or why not?

81

-70-

6. How successful do you think CAN will be?

Why?

7. What relationship exists between the successful organization of agroup and political resources of the group's leaders?

CAN and other agencies succeeded in mobilizing many citizens of

Riverside to fight for clean air. Due to the ability of their leaders,

CAN mounted a successful campaign to increase its membership. What began

as a small meeting of 26 people on an evening in the fall of 1969 had

grown to an organization of well over 1,000 members by 1972. rt constantly

sent out information about the effects of smog and encouraged citizens to

become active. CAN stood for more than just fighting smog. It represented

an organization through which people could become more actively involved

in the political life of Riverside.

Perhaps the most significant change which CAN promoted in Riverside

involved its leaders. Throughout the late '60's and the early '70's,

the city government showed few signs of joining the fight against smog.

Yet, as pressure increased upon them, members of city council began to

talk about the problem and to consider what to do. , Actording to Sharon

Cordaro, current President of CAN, the city pressured by CAN took action.

Her comments follow.

-71-

"CAN has accomplished a great deal. We now have a

number you can call and get.the oxidant reading. The

idea was that when we have a natural disaster like .

tornado, there are federal funds that are released to

help the area or there are state funds. We considered

this smog serious enough that it should be called a

disaster area, and we should be getting some kind of

funding help some place, either to set up for mass

transit or something that would help this problem.

So CAN got this whole thing going. The disaster

preparedness official from the city prepared this

long report. In it are a city council resolution,

emergency plan, statistics and legal and medical report

and economic report, because, of course, smog does a

tremendous amount of damage to crops and to materials

like paint on houses and it's rough on tires and so

forth, and a lot of people don't realize this. They

hate to pay a little more in taxes and a little more

for something, and yet they don't realize that they're

losing money and paying more in other ways. So,

anyway, this whole report was prepared and taken by the

mayor of Riverside up to Sacramento and presented to

the Governor and others. CAN was kind of the instigator

of that." (See Mayor Lewis' letter below.)

CITY OF

BEN H. LEWISMayor

-72-

CALIFORNIb 92501 714/787-7551

June 1, 1972

The Honorable Governor Ronald ReaganExecutive OfficesState Capitol BuildingSacramento, California

A di4a4ten i4 imminent, Govetnok Reagan,

in the South Coast Air Basin which includes Riverside,Although there may have been some improv3ments, it is

obvious, based on current projections, that immediatedrastic measures must be taken.

I have been directed by Resolution of our City Councilto request that you use the extraordinary emergencypowers granted you by the California Emergency ServicesAct to mandate immediate conversion of vehicles registeredin the-South Coast Air Basin to gaseous fuels.

The summer months are approaching. Evidence as outlined inthe report accompanying this letter and Resolution, is that

pottution id putting the citizen4 c16 thi4 ba4in in apo4ition o6 extreme petit and /on. di4a4telt. With theassistance of several eminently qualified local citizens,we have prepared the attached report, which is fullydocumented and contains a suggested emergency plan.

This problem is so serious that I am requesting all localgovernments in the South Coast Air Basin to support us in

this emergency.

invite your immediate and catgut con4idetation o6 thi4emergency neque4t and our proposal as to the solution tothis perilous situation.

Enclosures

SISTER CITIES

S"ncer

-Ben H.Mayor

84

CUA.UTLA, MEXICO AND SENDAI, JAPAN

-73-

The mayor was not entirely satisfied with the treatment he received

from the governor:

"Yes, we had some representatives of CAN go to Sacramento with us.

It was difficult for me to get the governor, at that time Reagan, to

show any concern. I had written him a letter in October, and I hadn't

received an answer to it in February. I called his office, and in a

few weeks I did get a letter. We made. an appointment and he gave us

20 minutes. Well, that's a long way to go to make a big presentation

like this, but he did show some interest and finally gave us an hour and

a half. We almost missed the plane coming back, but he was unwilling to

disrupt the oil companies and automobile manufacturers.

They seem to have priority on our lives. This is the part that

irritates me the most and I'll repeat it again, the automobile industry

does have the solution. I've had all kinds of them presented to me.

I'm not an engineer, but I've always called on somebody who I thought

was an expert who could assist me. But these people tnat I talk to

tell me that they can't even get in the front door at General Motors

and the other automobile manufacturers."

-74-

Mobilization and Change

Mobilization involves both the formation of a group and also the

ways in which the group solidifies support for an issue. Think about

the formation of Clean Air Now and the ways it solidified support for

clean air.

What political resources did the founders and leaders of CAN have?

What common goals guided the organization?

How did CAN maintain and increase its membership?

-75-

Mobilization can contribute to change'in a 'itical system.

Depending on the specific situation, mobilization Lan affect patterns

. of political resources and/or patterns of political activities. You

have read about Riverside in the 1960's. You have also studied infor-

mation about the activities of CAN and its effect on the system of

Riverside. Based upon changes caused by mobilization in the system,,

answer the following questions. Place a check in the appropriate box

and explain your answer.

Ideology

Explain:

/ / Change / / No Change

Influence

Explain:

/ / Change / / No Change

Wealth

Explain:

/ Change / / No Change

87

Participation

Explain:

-76-

/---7 Change L---7 No Change

Communication

Explain:

/ / Change / / No Change

Decision-Making

Explain:

/---7 Change L---7 No Change

Leadershi2

Explain:

/ Change No Change

Why were some patterns affected and not others?

83.

-77--

'WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Various options for fighting air-pollution existed in Riverside.

Some people joined CAN. Others bought filters for their air-conditioners

to clean the air as it entered their homes. Still others did nothing.

Think about the ways that smog affected the lives of people living in

Riverside.

Below you will find statements made by five different people who

are discussing ways to become involved in the pollution issue. Each

person proposes a different way to fight smog. Read each one carefully

and answer the questions which follow the statements.

George:

The city is doing O.K. as far as I'm concerned. They get paid to

watch out for the interest of the people who live in Riverside. I

work as closely as I can with the city government. I watch the papers

closely and if the Mayor or the city council say we should take it easy

because of the smog, or say we shouldn't drive as much, I listen.

Mary.:

I think we need to do more than just listen to our city officials.

I don't think they have done much to help us out. Many people in

Riverside are fed up with the lack of action on this thing. We had

smog ten years ago, and we have it today. We can't sit here for another

ten years or it'll kill us! It's time we formed an organization whose

sole purpose is to rid this area of smog. I don't think I could lead

such a group, but I think that's what we need.

89

-78-

Joe:

You're right, Mary. But I don't think forming a group is enough.

We need to get some attention here; let people know how bad things are.

To do this, I propose that we organize a one-week strike of all workers

in the area. We could bring the city to a halt. We'd have national

news coverage to show people what smog looks like and what we are doing

about it.

I suggest that I contact Bill Martin in the Mayor's office.

With his influence down there, he can help to organize the city workers.

Mary, you can get in touch with civic clubs like Kiwanas, Lions, and

the League of Women Voters. I'll get with the Parks and Recreation people

to arrange a place for a huge demonstration.

Vivian:

Hold on, Joe, I think we need to take action, too. Mary is talking

about forming a citizen's group and you're talking about shutting the

city down. Were all concerned, but you may alienate a lot of people

with your plan. Couldn't you include aspects of your plan in Mary's?

After all, if a citizen's group isn't successful, we have an organization

through which to mobilize people for a demonstration.

Mark:

You've all got good ideas. For myself, I'd prefer to let the

situation develop. I need to watch what's happening before I can make

an intelligent decision about what to do.

-79-

QUESTIONS

1. If you were in Riverside, whose point of view would you agree with?

2. Why?

NEWS /7-EM- CALIFORNIA(1OFFICIALS -DISCUSS A

GIANT FAN -.TUNNEL Tv\OUG1-1-I-NE MOUNTAINS AS A MEANSTO -R1D AREA OF SMOG !!

1444-6.06-

LE

-80-

The Highway Lobby

As Activity One pointed out, the California State Constitution

diverted all "gas tax" monies to the construction of highways within

the state. The Collier Burns Act of 1947 specified the precise ways

in which these funds are allocated. Senator Randolf Collier introduced

this Act. In 1959, he introduced the Collier Master, Plan for Freeways

which established the goal of building a 12,500 mile state freeway and

expressway system. Until recently, Senator Collier of Yreka, California,

chaired the California Senate Transportation Committee. The Committee

possesses the power to kill any transportation bill which threatens to

divert gas tax money away from highway construction. Under Senator

Collier's leadership, the Committee placed the protection of this money

as its first priority.

Many organizations throughout the state also wish to protect this

money. They want to restrict its use to the construction and maintenance

of highways. Below you will find short descriptions of several such

groups. Read the descriptions carefully and answer the questions which

follow them.

1. The California State Automobile Association and the Auto Club ofSouthern California (AAA)

If you have ever had a flat tire, you may know about the services

which an automobile club provides. In many states, the clubs offer

towing and mechanical help to member divers. Also, AAA sells automobile

insurance to its members.

-81-

The California AAA has fought to defeat many mass transit bills

'introduced into the legislature through Senate Transportation Committee,

even though its members would surely benefit from the development of,

mass transit as an alternative to driving which protects the landscape.

2. California Division of Highways

This state agency provides the expert engineering which helps

build the state's freeways. Money from the gas tax pays many salaries

of Division personnel. The Division works hard to convince Californians

of the importance of freeways. In a Division publication titled How Los

Angeles Was Unified by Freeways, Robert D. Zaniboni, a highway administra-

tive officer, revealed the philosophy of his agency. "The challenge to

men and machines to move mountains is here. We have a vast area for

construction; we have the money and what's planned for the area mostly

lies ahead. We've only scratched the surface ... Population means money ...

We've been doing things in a big way, money-wise. Look at the con-

struction schedule. Every couple of weeks, it seems, we let a contract

for six million dollars, seven million dollars, five million dollars.

Here's one for fourteen million dollars. That takes a lot of engineering

of varied kinds. It's the big time!"

3. California Trucking Associates

This group has over 2,000 members throughout the state. Trucking is

big business in California. Thanks to this business, stores and industry

receive a steady flow of material needed to operate. In turn, consumers

find stores well stocked. The nature of their business demands that

93

-82-

truckers unite to insure the development of a completed freeway system

throughout the state. California Trucking Associates serves 4n

umbrella organization within which truckers can work for this common

goal. In addition to the trucking companies, the Teamsters Union often

works closely with California Trucking Associates. Because many

Teamsters work for trucking companies, they often disagree over such

things as wages and benefits. However, in Sacramento they work together

to protect tieir common interests.

4. Oil Companies

In California, as in other states, the oil companies, through

service stations, fuel the vehicles which ride the freeways. California

hosts quite a number of oil companies including Atlantic-Richfield, Gulf

Oil, Humble Oil, Mobil Oil, Phillips Petroleum, Shell Oil, Standard Oil

of California, Union Oil and others.

1. What common interests do these groups have?

2. Name three ways by which they could work together to achieve thesecommon goals?

1.

2.

3.

94

-83-

Throughout the 1960's many attempts were made to use some portion

of the gas tax revenues for construction of local transit systems. Mary

Kiley referred to one such attempt, Proposition 18. To the AAA, the

California Division of Highways, California Trucking Associates, and the

Oil companies, nothing could be more undesirable. Their existence

depended on the successful development of a freeway system. They perceived

all such attempts to divert gas tax revenues as threats. The protection

of these revenues and the promotion of highways in California, prompted

these groups to establish offices in Sacramento, the state capital. From

there, they watched all attempts to amend Article XXVI of the State

Constitution. They worked closely with Senator Collier's Transportation

Committee in this regard. These groups plus others including the Trailer

Coach Association, the Motor Car Dealers Association of Northern and

Southern California and many concrete companies became known as the

"Highway Lobby." Created because various groups sought to achieve a

common goal, the Highway Lobby quickly became one of the most powerful

political forces in California. It has successfully defeated every effort

to divert gas tax revenues for development of mass transit systems.

-84-

Discussion Questions for The Highway Lobby

1. What goals guide the activities of the Highway Lobby?

2. What political resources do the leaders have?

Name Resources

3. Give three examples of the methods used by the Highway Lobby tosupport the fight for clean air?

4. How successful do you think the lobby will be?

Why?

5. How are CAN and the Highway Lobby similar?

-85-

ACTIVITY THREE: RIVERSIDE IN COURT

Successful mobilization combined with the political environment

affected the system of Riverside in several ways. The leadership of

Riverside showed evidence of its increased attention to the problems caused

by smog. The city government developed an anti-pollution plan which

Mayor Lewis took to Sacramento on behalf of the city. In addition, in

February of 1972, the city took two actions in response to increasing public

pressure. First, the Riverside city council voted to establish an eleven

member Environmental Protection Commission. The Commission had powers to

investigate activities of the city related to environment. It was established

to advise the city council and the city manager, Dan Stone. Most of its

members were selected because they were experts in such fields as health

and law. In addition to the city government, the Riverside County Board of

Supervisors toughened the county smog regulations. As of February, 1972,

Riverside county had the most strict rules in the state.

Clean Air Now demonstrated its ability to alter two other aspects of

the system of Riverside. It helped increase the number of people involved

in political life by engaging them, in anti-smog activities. Also, it.began

to makE many people think involvement in the smog crisis was important.

In 1968, many Riversiders did not recognize smog as an important problem.

By 1972 and '73, many citizens realized the adverse effects of smog on

business and plant and animal life.

The following table was taken from a 1973 Riverside Opinion Survey

conducted for Dan Stone. It depicts Riversiders' feelings about the

seriousness of the smog issue.

-86,

Seriousness of Air Pollution

Riverside(n=400) California

SouthernCalifornia

Extremely Serious 75% 25% 32%

Very Serious 15% 29% 32%

Somewhat Serious 8% 27% 20%

Not Too Serious 1% 14% 11%

Not at all Serious 1% 5% 3%

The same interview revealed that more than 70% of the respondents

felt that smog in Riverside was worse than a year before the survey was

undertaken. Compared to other community problems, the survey showed the

relative seriousness of air pollution.

Seriousness of Community

Serious:

Problems (n=400)

Very Fairly Not No Response

Unemployment 23% 33% 23% 21%

Traffic 20% 32% 46% 2%

Air Pollution 88% 10% 2%

Illegal Drugs 36% 27% 15% 22%

Availability of RecreationalFacilities 20% 31% 43% 6%

Property Taxes 20% 26% 33% 21%

Crime 34% 44% 17% 5%

Poverty 26% 34% 28% 12%

Availability of Child Care Centers 20% 13% 21% 46%

Minority Relations 20% 35% 36% 9%

Quality of Local Schools 15% 23% 46% 16%

Public Transportation 40% 27% 20% 13%

Vocational or Job Training 21% 21% 28% 30%

Availability of CommunityActivities 16% 24% 46% 14%

Noise 18% 21% 61%

Reputation of Community 12% 18% 65% 5%

Availability of Housing 9% 19% 63% 9%

Above Ground Utility Lines 11% 24% 54% 11%

Following you will find the summarized text of a law suit, Riverside v.

Ruckelshaus. It represents one way Riverside demonstrated its increased

frustration at the seriousness of the smog. Read the suit carefully and

answer the questions which follow it.

98

-87-

RIVERSIDE v. RUCKELSHAUS

U.S. District CourtCentral District of California

CITY OF RIVERSIDE; CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO; THE REGIONAL ANTI-

POLLUTION AUTHORITY, a joint-powers agency; DESERT PEOPLE UNITED, a

nonprofit corporation; EDWARD MEHREN, and CHRISTOPHER J. DIEBENKORN v.

WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS, as Administrator, Environmental Protection

Agency, No. 72-2122-IH, November 16, 1972.

FINDINGS OF FACT

A. Plaintiffs filed a Complaint on September 6, 1972, claiming that

defendent William D. Ruckelshaus, as Administrator of the Environmen-

tal Protection Agency, failed to perform a duty imposed upon him by

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act of 1970. They sought to have this

Court order the defendant to prepare and publish an implementation plan

for the South Coast Air Basin showing that the national air quality

standards will be met in the Basin within the time prescribed by law.

B. Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction on September

6, 1972, requesting that the defendant, Administrator, immediately

prepare and publish such an implementation plan for the South Coast

Air Basin.

C. Attached by plaintiffs to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction were

the affadavits of eight residents of the South Coast Air Basin

including medical doctors. They indicated that air pollution in the

Basin is presenlly a severe problem with adverse health effects,

resulting therefrom, and that plaintiffs had actively sought solutions

to the problem. They were injured by the Administrator's failure to

propose an implementation plan.

99

-88-

D. On or about February 23, 1972, the Administrator received from

the State of California an implementation plan to achieve the

Federal air quality standards within the various air quality control

regions in California.

E. On May 24, 1972, the Administrator announced his disapproval of large

portions of the California plan.

F. Certain regulations proposed by the Administrator on September 22,

1972, to correct deficiencies in the California implementation plan

apparently completed the plan with respect to the South Coast Air

Basin. However, they did not set forth the necessary transportation

controls to meet the photochemical oxidant standard.

THE CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1970

A. The Clean Air Act of 1970 requires each state to adopt an implementa-

tion plan specifying the manner in which air quality standards will

be achieved within each air quality control region. If a state fails

to submit a satisfactory implementation plan, the Act requires the

Administrator ta develop such a plan.

The Clean Air Act establishes firm deadlines for actions to be taken

by a state and by the Administrator in furtherance of the goal of

clean air.

C. The Administrator failed to comply with the final July 31, 1972

deadline even though section 110 of the Clean Air Act states: "The

Administrator shall, after consideration of any State hearing record,

promptly prepare and publish proposed regulations setting forth an

implementation plan, or portion thereof, for a State if --

100

-89-

(2) the plan, or any portion thereof, submitted for such

State is determined by the Administrator not to be in

accordance with the requirements of this section.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

A. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.

B. By not publishing proposed regulations for transportation controls

for the Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate Air Quality Control

Region by July 31, 1972, the Administrator breached a duty under

the Clean Air Act of 1970.

C. None of the justifications or excuses for delay alleged by the

Administrator are valid under the statute.

D. Judgment for plaintiffs is granted on the merits, and the defendent

is ordered to prepare and publish no later than January 15, 1973,

regulations setting forth an implementation plan for attaining the

air quality standard in California.

E. The court declines to award plaintiffs costs or attorneys' fees since

the action is one against the U.S. Government.

101

-90-

Questions

1. Who filed the suit?

2. Who was the defendant?

3. Why was the suit filed?

4. Name three ways by which the outcome of the suit could affectRiverside?

2.

3.

Political Innovation

The suit which Riverside filed represented a political innovation.

An innovation is any new procedure deliberately introduced into a

system and justified by its expected consequences for the system. Usually,

innovations contribute to change in that they provide people an additional05.5

avenue for p'articipation. For example, until 19t8ain the city of Mont-

gomery, Alabama, blacks were restricted to riding in the rear sections of

1u2

-91-

city buses. In that year, however, the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.

organized a black boycott of the city buses. It ldsted for nearly 400 days

and finally led to a lawsuit. The suit was ultimately heard by the

Supreme Court of the United States, which held that segregated seating was

unconstitutional. The boycott represented an innovation introduced by

King. It was a new procedure, never having been practiced in Montgomery

/955.before Wet. It was deliberately introduced into the system, having been

carefully planned by King. It was also justified on the basis of its

expected consequences for the system, the elimination of racial segrega-

tion in public transportation in Montgomery.

Refer to the list below and identify the innovations. Be certain

the items on the list meet the three requirements of the definition.

Place a check in the appropriate box to indicate the requirement has

been met. Also indicate the system to which the innovation has been

introduced.

163

1. The fourth annual boycottto protest food service inthe school cafeteria.

2. The U.S. Clean Air Act.

-92-

NewProcedure

System:

System:

3. Joining the first protestmarch in your town because I

you are mad.

4. Writing letters to Congressmembers to protest smog

5. Accidentally participatingin Boston's first anti-abortion march.

System:

System:

System:

DeliberatelyIntroduced

Justifiedby Expected

Consequences

In 1970, the Congress passed amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1967.

The 1970 amendments called on the administrator of the Environmental

Protection Agency to develop a national air quality standard for any air

pollutant. It called on the states to develop plans for implementing

these standards within each state. Section 110, paragraph (a) of the 1970

amendments established the following, responsibilities for the states and

for the EPA.

-93-

1. The administrators of the EPA must set national stan-dards for air quality.

2. Within nine months after standards have been set, eachstate must adopt a plan which provides for implementation,maintenance, and enforcement of the standards within eachstate. This plan must be submitted to the EPA.

3. Within four months of receiving the plan, the EPA mustapprove or disapprove it.

4. Within six months after the date required for submitting theplan, the EPA must make any revisions necessary for the planto meet the national air quality standards.

5. The EPA must prepare and publish an implementation plan fora state if:

- -The state fails to submit a plan within the allowablenine months.

--The plan submitted is not in accordance with EPA require-ments.

- -The state fails to revise the plan.

The Clean Air Act of 1970 set a 1975 deadline for meeting the stan-

dards it set. However, it did give the EPA the authority to grant two

additional years in areas which did not have the technology to meet the

standards. Thus, the EPA was bound to replace or modify any portion of

a plan within nine months after disapproving it; in the case of California,

by July 31, 1972.

Federal standards were set and within nine months the EPA began

evaluating the plans submitted by each state. However, it approved the

plans of only nine states. It published the problems cited in each of

the inadequate plans. The California plan lacked:

1. Regulations for APCD's to stop construction of factorieswhich would cause the federal standards to be exceeded.

. Proper provisions for the state to take emergency action inmajor smog alerts. Such action includes shutting downfactories and limiting the use of cars.

105

-94-

3. Methods for citizens to get emissions information necessaryto control pollution.

4. Requirements for disclosure of emissions from factories andcommercial facilities.

The two month period granted by the Clean Air Act meant that the EPA

had to complete a revised plan by July 31. Observers in Southern

California watched as the sixty days passed. It appeared that no plan

would be ready by the thirty-first.

Mayor Lewis met with Governor Reagan in late summer. At that time,

the Mayor presented the Riverside emergency plan to rid the area of smog.

On September 1, the state Attorney- General announced that the state had no

power to implement the Riverside plan. The newspapers noted the Mayor's

disgust and reported that he was looking elsewhere for help.

Frustrated at the lack of action of California and the EPA, and

suffering under an increasingly serious blanket of smog, the city of

Riverside tried a new tactic.

The Regional Anti-Pollution Authority (RAPA), a #oup of cities to the

south of Riverside had filed a suit against the EPA. They hired a law firm

in Los Angeles called the Center for Law and the Public Interest. RAPA

intended to sue the EPA for its failure to create a substitute plan for

California.' The city of Riverside decided to join in the suit. Though

a variety of other anti-smog activities had been introduced into River-

side, a lawsuit represented something completely new. The suit was filed

against William Ruckelshaus and has since become known as Riverside v.

Ruckelshaus.

Riverside won the case. As a result, the EPA was ordered to develop

and implement a plan immediately for the South Coast Air Basin. The

1J6

-95-

preamble to the EPA plan read "legal requirements placed on the agency ...

leave the administration with no presently available legal alternative

but to propose this plan." California had such a drastic smog problem

that the EPA plan proposed equally drastic measures. The plan called for

rationing gasoline to cut its consumption by over 80% in the smog months of

May through October. One of its other features called for an increase

in city parking costs. This aspect of the plan was designed to encourage

motorists to join car pools and thus drive fewer cars into cities in the

basin. Though this stringent plan eventually was replaced by a more

moderate one, it did demonstrate that Riverside's use of a lawsuit had been

quite effective. Asked why Riverside joined in the suit, Mary Nichols,

their lawyer said, "They (Riverside and San Bernardino) see the Clean Air

Act as their only hope."

Innovation and Change

The following questions will help to explain the suit in terms of the

definition of innovation presented in the text. Answer each question as

fully as you can.

1. How was the legal procedure different from other activitiestried before?

2. How was the suit deliberately introduced?

107

-96

EPA officials explain plan to citizens of South Coast Air Basin*

S

'411111"">""

EPA officials explain plan to city officers. Mayor Lewis,

(second from right)*

*Pictures from Riverside PressEnterprise (reprinted by permission).

109.

-97-

4 3. What were the'expected consequences of the suit?

The suit had no immediate consequences for Riverside. The smog did

not suddenly clear despite the stringent rules set forth by Ruckelshaus.

His plan caused major criticism of the role of the EPA in California

affairs. In Riverside, Mayor Lewis commented on the plan.

"I've heard it said that EPA was unhappy. I think EPA earnestly

tried to come up with a plan with little experience. It was a

bureaucratic attempt to come up with a plan on the drawing board,

but, it was not practical."

Art Pick, a member of the city council had a similar reaction to the

EPA plan.

"The city of Riverside had an interesting dilemma. I was

on the council when we went to a non-profit law firm, Law in

The Public Interest, and we sued the EPA to come up with regUla-

tions. When they came up with the regulations, the same city

of Riverside said, 'That's ridiculous: It was as if somebody

said, 'Well,.you're going to have to do something.' And they

said, 'Well, I'll teach you, I'll come up with the most ridiculous

thing I can think of,' and they came up with the EPA parking

regulations. That didn't make any sense to anybody, and, of

course, the Chamber was in a position of literally fighting

that particular one, because it would have put business in

southern California virtually out of t)siness."

109'

-98-

Negative reaction to the EPA plan was widespread. Few people believed

it could be implemented. Despite the success or failure of EPA's inter-

vention, it served as an example of the effect of lawsuits. While many

people disagreed about the intelligence of EPA, not one doubted the effec-

tiveness of the new tactic employed by Riverside.

The suit proved that the city fathers were willing to take decisive

action. By joining in the suit, they demonstrated their rising concern about

smog and its effect on the Riverside community.

Groups throughout southern California looked carefully at the idea of

using lawsuits to help clean the air. CAN used this tactic quite success-

fully in 1974. The following statement was made by a past president of

CAN. Read it carefully and answer the questions which follow it.

" In 1974, we hired a law firm in Los Angeles, because the Los

Angeles APCD, the Air Pollution.Control District, was taking the

position that the information they obtained on factories and other

air polluters -- stationary air polluters -- was not public

information. They said it was just something between the Air

Pollution Control District and the polluter. Their position was

this -- here's a factory that's polluting and if you make public

the fact that they may have this chemical and that chemical or some

other chemical-in their pollution, why then some competitor can say,

'Oh, that's the thing that they're putting in their product that

I'm not putting in my product. I now know their secret and I can

compete better with them.' The Air Pollution Control District said,

'We aren't going to let you have that information. We aren't going

to make it public because it's a secret, it's a trade secret.'

We contended that it was notia-trade secret and that the people

110

-99-

were entitled to that information because they were the ones

that were suffering. Whether it might help a competitor or not

was just an incidental situation. So, we hired a law firm in

Los Angeles, and we made quite a bitch, and, of course, we

threatened a law suit against the LAAPC. But we had to go that

far and finally got them to publish all of the ingredients of

the pollutions of the various stationary polluters in Los Angeles.

Now any one could go there and get that information."

1. Why was the suit filed?

2. What were the expected consequences of this suit?

3. What were the consequences?

Think about how innovation contributed to change in Riverside. Respond

to the following items with respect to how they have been affected by

innovation.

111

Ideology

Explain:

Influence

Explain:

Wealth

Change

-100-

No Change

Change No Change

1

I Change I I No Change

Explain:

Participation

1Change I I No Change

Explain:

Communication

IChange

Explain:

No Change

Decision-Making

II Change

Explain:

No Change

Leadership

I] Change

Explain:

-101-

No Change

Why were some patterns affected and not others?

1 0 2

The following case illustrates change in another political system,

South Austin. As you read it, consider how mobilization and innovation

contribute to change.

OakPark

Ohio

Lake

Washington

Roosevelt

I I

0.B.A. Office

El Austin H.S.

AustinColumbus

Igpmium Eisenhowers EXp.

industrial area

NAksti1;6 t:.,er.fa to,tdiVte

rigida

Oak Park .

Cicero

CHICAGO

LAKE

1 in.= approx..7 mi.

Chicago

Cicero

MICHIGAN

IllinoisI.

, E.Chicago

IHammond Gary

Indiana4

1 in.= approx. 16 rd. I

- I 03-

South Austin Changes

The community of Austin is located on the south side of Chicago. This

area of the city has undergone both social and political changes due to

the expansion of ghetto areas which lie to its east. Many people have

labeled Austin itself a ghetto, a suggestion which the residents of this

community would vigorously dispute.

In the early 1960's, Austin was a predominantly white community.

However, by the end of the decade many whites had moved out and middle class

blacks moved into the Southern part of Austin. South Austin which extends

from Lake Street on the North to Roosevelt Road on the South has become

a predominantly black community. Today, the residents of South Austin

consider it a separate community. To its north lies North Austin. To the

south lies Cicero, an Eastern European community, known in the late 60's

for its violent clashes between blacks and whites. On the west lies the

community of Oak Park. On, the east, the Eisenhower expressway leads into

the heart of downtown Chicago.

ot,

4-O

4-3

S.CI)

CI) toCr/

OS..

S- 0cr)

CD 0S. 9--

0CL.

*The three pictures of South Austin in this case come from Radicals in UrbanPolitics -- The Alinsky Approach, Robert Bailey, Jr., University of Chicago

Press, Chicago, 1972. 1 1+i

- I 0 4 -

In the late 1960's it looked as thoUgh South Austin might suffer a fate

similar to other communities on the edge of Chicago's ghetto. In many

communities, middle income residents moved outward from the crowded and .

deteriorating conditions of Chicago's central city. They sought better

neighborhoods further away from the inner city. Therefore, many residents

would leave their poor housing for others to rent and to occupy. People

with lower incomes who could afford the recently abandoned housing would

move in to these areas. As a result, the same area was occupied by people

who rarely had the ability to improve the conditions there.

Evidence began to mount that this cycle was affecting South Austin.

The number of crimes began to rise rapidly. Violent crimes rose by 17%

in the area while the rest of Chicago saw a 1.5% decrease for the same

period. Fire station runs rose from 657 in 1965 to 1400 in 1970. The

quality of the schools also declined. Many white teachers and adWnistrators

fled the school system placing a severe overload on the remaining school

employees. As a result the size of an average class. increased to more than

fifty students. However, no permanent structures were built to accommodate

the growing number of students. Even temporary facilities were inadequate

because they were frequently vandalized. Austin High School became the scene

of violent clashes between black and white students and eventually 25 police-

men were called in to patrol the halls.

Both blacks and whites wanted to stop the apparent deterioration of

South Austin. Many white families which had remained after the racial

transition did not want to move away, and the new middle class blacks

wanted a decent neighborhood in which to raise their families. Both

groups were willing to work together to stop the trouble in the community.

-105-

Most residents of South Austin felt it was futile to appeal to the

Chicago city government for help. They felt powerless to affect Mayor

Daley's Democratic machine which dominated the city administration.

Mayor Daley kept tight control over most aspects of the city government.

The City Council and the Aldermen, elected from local wards, seldom openly

opposed the Mayor. Those who did, often lost whatever suppot they had from

the Daley machine, including their jobs.

One tie which kept the democratic machine in firm control of South Austin

was its ability to disperse public jobs throughout the city. Daley's admini-

stration dispensed these jobs, called patronage jobs, to people who had served

Daley or the Democratic party. Staying active in Democratic party functions

and in election campaigns could qualify a person for one of the more than

30,000 patronage jobs in Chicago. These jobs included street cleaning,

garbage collection, secretarial work, and other types of employment. The

people in these positions knew that their jobs and their livelihood depended

on their continued cooperation with the Democratic machine. In this way,

the Mayor kept a firm grip on his administration and on activities in local

communities throughout the city. In one of the twn wards in South Austin,

between 400 and 500 patronage jobs existed.

Residents in South Austin showed little faith in their. Aldermen. Only

39% of the whites and 33% of the blacks felt that the Aldermen were

interested in helping the community. With a distant city government,

citizens who wanted to change conditions in South Austin looked elsewhere

for help.

When blacks first moved into Austin, the local clergy formed a group

called the Austin Community Organization (ACO). The ACO sought to ease

the transition of Au, in from a white neighborhood to a black and white

I 06-

one. A competing organization, the United Property Group (UPG) fought to

keep blacks out of South Austin. The rivalry between the two groups was

intense. In response to the UPG's extreme racism, the ACO became more

radical in-its support of integration. Soon the moderates left the ACO,

and both groups, without any moderate community support, folded in 1965.

Many clergymen still felt South Austin needed a community organization

to deal with the problems of a shifting racial balance. To help establish

such an organization, they hired a professional organizer named Tom Gaudette.

Having organized a similar group in another community, Gaudette possessed

experience and organizational skills. In addition, his experiences and his

initial successes in South Austin gained him respect from the citizens of

the community. He began in South Austin by organizing small grass-roots .

-107-

groups ta fight specific problems such as poor garbage pickups by the city.

These initial groups, plus other interested organizations in the area, formed

an umbrel.11a organization called the Organization for a Better Austin (OBA).

The OBA included organizations, not individuals. Any officially

organized group containing at least ten members could join the OBA. The

number of organizations in it fluctuated from year to year. There were 189

in 1969, 124 in 1970, and 146 in 1971. Many of the groups which were formed

to fight a specific problem disbanded when the problem was solved. OBA,

however, as an umbrella organization, continued to exist. There were

continually new community problems and new groups formed to fight them.

Organizations became eager to join the OBA and work through it because OBA

had an established reputation. People were more likely to listen to it than

to a small, newly formed pressure-group. In addition, OBA used its more

extensive resources to help member organizations mobilize Austin residents.

Block clubs formed the heart of the OBA. (See Table 1.) Residents

formed clubs to improve conditions in their immediate neighborhood. They

deal with everyday problems.

119

-108-

TABLE 1*

Type of Organizationsin the OBA 1969 1970 1971

Block Clubs 85 70 90

OBA Committees 9 1 9

Church Groups 56 28 26

Associations of BlockClubs 2 4 3

Social Service 4 2 2

Public Ed. Youth 18 7 8

Business 2 0 1

Tenants 0 2 2

Miscellaneous 13 10 5

They might call the dog catcher about strays, complain about the noise,

meet with their Alderman to demand better garbage collection.

The OBA made good use of block clubs. It divided South Austin into areas.

Each month organizers would hold a meeting of block club captains from

their area. This gave the captains a chance to discuss common problems and

plan strategy. The OBA block clubs became a good way of mobilizing the

residents and solidifying support for improvements in community conditions.

As true grass roots organizations, they provided a rapid and effective

communication link with the residents of South Austin. If an emergency

meeting was arranged, an OBA organizer simply called the block club captains

and the word spread quickly.

*Robert Bailey, Jr., Radicals in Urban Politics -- The Alinsky Approach,University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1972, 11474

120

I 0 9

eleaffieZi'

491l1IeteasonmasoismatROSE. NEIPUS KEEP OUR BLOCKS SAFE$ BEAUTIFUL 'NERVING

TIE FOLLOWING [',. *KEEP

li :ITOTIIT TLITTER

1m rThEET

"l RNBIOWING":`DON'T BLOCK DRIVEWAYS

CURB YOUR poG

_NO FEEDINGNO LOITERING

r MIlEeili'"' :*-

The Organizations for a Better Austin held annual congresses which

were important for soliciting active support from both the community and

member organizations. An OBA congress was much like a national political

convention. Decorated signs identified the member organizations and posters

supported candidates for various offices. While the congress has some

constitutional duties, such as electing officers and approving the budget,

its main function is more symbolic. It provides a chance to inform the

community about the OBA, to attract new organizations and to give members

a sense of unity.

1 Y,1

-I I 0-

Between congresses, the OBA utilized protest tactics to help improve

the community. These tactics mobilized community support for or against

specific problems. Protest represented a new and effective form of political

participation in South Austin. The OBA researched problems so that.protests

could be effectively directed at the correct target. The purpose of an

OBA protest was to disrupt social stability in order to achieve a compromise

solution to a problem.

Protest took a variety of forms in South Austin. For example, a boy-

cott in 1968 forced the Chicago Board of Education to relieve overcrowded

elementary schools in the community. This tactic was effective because the

amount of state aid for education Chicago received was based on school

attendance. When attendance dropped, so did the amount of aid given to

the city.

OBA picketed Chicago real estate firms in order to inform the public

of its housing complaints, and it frequently invited public officials to

community meetings. There they were skillfully questioned, often in

very emotional exchanges, until they agreed to work more closely with the

citizens of. South Austin.

Several methods of protest were used against absentee slum landlords.

To pressure the landlords, OBA organized residents who rented deteriorating

housing. An effective tactic used against landlords and public officials

involved visits to their homes in the affluent Chicago suburbs or at their

church on Sundays. There, OBA organizers distributed pamphlets describing

the condition of the property owned by the landlord. Sometimes the mere

presence of a large group of black tenants was enough to convince a land-

lord to promise to make improvements in his buildings.

Once a protest received a person's attention, the OBA workers negotiated

an arrangement with the landlord or public official. )his arrangement was

as important as the protest itself. First, it listed the specific grievances

and the procedures for correcting them. Second, it called for a public

official to investigate the situation, and third, it established a deadline

for tne completion of the work.

By introducing protest tactics and follow-up negotiations into South

Austin, the OBA gave residents an outlet for their frustrations. But even

more importantly, it gave them a means for halting the deterioration of

their community. It also trained a cadre of leaders aid effectively

organized the grass-roots block clubs. South Austin now has the leadership

and organizational framework to continue active political participation

in community affairs. The Aldermen remain as representatives of the

community. However, the increased involvement of citizens in the community

had created a more responsive leadership.

1 2 3

Questions

I. Who established the OBA?

. What Political Resources did the founder(s) have?

3. What goals guided the organization?

4. How did the '73A gain and maintain membership?

5. What new procedures were introduced to Sou:1-1-1 Austin

which contributed to change?

6. Why were they introduced?

7. How did mobilization and innovation contribute to

change in South Austin?

-112-

ACTIVITY FOUR: MORE GROUPS

ImmomINIMIMA

CALIFORNIA "DISTRICTC.ouRT REQUIRES You%

SIGIJATURE .....

soNE FIGURESFROM THE

NOW, AT THE ENVIRONMENTALPRoTEcTiosi AGENCY, WE SEE IT

TH/5 WAY....

YOUR FRIENDSIN THE STATESENATE URGEYOU 70

I'LL JUST LET YoUSPEAK To THE L.A.COUNTY POLLUTION

contrRoL oFFICEl

THE GoVERNoR,SENDS THIS

INFORMATION..

In the late 1960's Riverside still considered itself a small town

where everyone knew everyone else. During this period, smog, became

recognized as a serious issue by the citizens who lived there. Their

response to the problem brought about changes in the political system of

Riverside. For example, the successful mobilization of an active anti-

smog citizen's group, CAN, provided an organization through which people

could participate in political life. Through its newsletter, CAN made

I I 3-

many citizens sensitive to the issue of smog. What had previously been

a "bother" to many people became a serious problem.

As the issue took'on more importance, it soon became apparent that

the issue ina,.s not limited to Riverside and the South Coast Air Basin.

Riverside had become interdependent with a variety of political groups

throughout California and the country. Iriterdependence occurs when groups

must interact in order to get things done. In the space below, list the

groups with which Riverside had to interact as it sought to improve the

quality of the air.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Many of the groups with which Riverside had to interact became new

political forces. For example, Governor Reagan became a powerful political

force. The city leaders felt that the only way to implement an effective

clean air plan for the South Coast Air Basin was through the state govern-

ment. So, they developed a plan in hopes of submitting it to Governor

Reagan. They met with him, but he did not accept the Riverside plan.

Riverside leaders developed the plan in response to a problem which

existed in their city. However, the scope of the issue had become so

large that they could not act without the cooperation of the Governor.

The Governor, by his failure to approve the plan, prompted Riverside to

interact with another part of the political environment, the court.

-114-

The California District Court became an extremely powerful political,

force in 1972. By ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to impose

an implementation plan on the South Coast Air Basin, the Court intro-

duced a new dimension into the political situation. The plan which resulted

from its intervention was very strict. While Riverside joined in filing

the suit, its leaders were put in the position of opposing its results.

No one in the city government could accept the stringent gasoline rationing

called for or the expensive parking regulations suggested by EPA. This

situation arose because of the interdependence between Riverside and the

California District Court. As the leaders in Riverside became more

conscious of air quality, their interaction with other groups increased.

They found quickly that they were interdependent with many aspects of the

political environment. Interdependence significantly widened the scope

of the fight for clean air in Riverside.

An incident which occurred in May of 1972 further illustrates how

interdependence increased the scope of the smog issue. Previous to that

time, all Air Pollution Control Districts were administered by three members.

Among their responsibilities, these three people had the power to grant

permission to industries who wished to exceed anti-pollution standards.

Citizens of Riverside had argued for years that the Board of the Los

Angeles Air Pollution Control District granted too many "variances." They

suggested that these permissions resulted in accumulation of industrial

pollution which eventually blew into Riverside. On May 24, 1974, the

California State Assembly passed a bill introduced by Republican Assembly-

man Craig Biddle of Riverside. It required all Air Pollution Boards to

hold formal, public hearings on all requests by firms who could not meet

anti-pollution standards. While it is too early to judge, this procedure

may reduce the number of such permissions granted in Los Angeles County.

-115-

Therefore, it may cut down on the industrial pollutants which blow from

there to Riverside.

The Biddle bill focuses on two other powerful political forces with

which Riverside interacted, the State Assembly and the LAAPCD. Riverside

simply could not deal with the problem of air pollution by turning inward.

In many ways, the successes Riverside achieved depended on the extent to

which its leaders recognized their interdependence with the political

environment. As Riverside has experienced change due to its response to

smog, interdependence has enlarged the scope of this change as well as

introduced new political forces.

Your teacher will now divide the class into small groups. Together

with the other members of your group, make a list of the actions by which

Riverside attempted to achieve clean air. One action Riverside took, for

instance,, involved constant pressure upon the state Air Resources Bpard.

If the ARB would require anti-smog devices on cars in the state, then

cars would produce a smaller amount of pollution. Riverside might

experience cleaner air. What other actions did Riverside take?

1.. Pressure for strict exhaust requirements.

2.

3

4.

5.

Interdependence meant that each time Riverside tried to improve the

air, quality, it usually had to interact with a part of the politic'al

environment. For example, a plan for more strict exhaust control required

action from the State Air Resources Board. By itself, Riverside lacked

128

I I 6-

authority to develop such a plan. The actions the Board did or did not take

directly affected Riverside. In Activity One, Mary Kiley describes the

various responsibilities of the Board.

Return to the list you just completed. For each Riverside activity

you mentioned, think carefully about a part of the political environment

with which Riverside was forced to interact. Complete the following lists

as in number 1.

Part of Political EnvironmentRiverside Action Which Riverside Interacted With

1. Pressure for strict exhaustrequirements State Air Resources Board

2.

3,

4.

5.

Just as the system of Riverside was interdependent with the political

environment, so were groups within Riverside. In its early years Clean

Air Now expressed an interest in providing detailed knowledge about smog

to the citizens of the South Coast Air Basin. Realizing the limitations

of its newsletter, CAN submitted a proposal to the Department of Health,

Education and Welfare, Office of Education. The proposal requested over

$33000 to educate community leaders, legislative representatives, and

the general public about the dangers of smog. CAN was forced to interact

with HEW in order to implement this program. HEW ultimately rejected CAN's

proposal. In addition to HEW, CAN became interdependent with other aspects

- I 17-

of the political environment. In number 2 below name another action

'taken by CAN which caused] t to interact with a part of the political

environment.

Part of Political EnvironmentCAN Action Which CAN Interacted With

1. Proposal to educate public Department of Health, Educationand Welfare

2.

As you probably have concluded, it simply became impossible for Riverside

to act without becoming involved with numerous other groups. Riverside

was not only affected by what happened in Riverside, but often by what

happened outside of the city. The list below may resemble those you con-

structed. They point out actions taken by Riverside and CAN and their

resulting interactions with the political' environment.

Riverside Action

Interaction WithPolitical Environment

1. Push for exhaust devices State Air Resources Board

2. Suit filed against W. Ruckelshaus Environmental Protection Agency

3. Development of "Riverside Plan" Governor Reagan

4. Suit filed against W. Ruckelshaus California District Court

5. Push for fewer "variances"granted to industry by APCD's California State Assembly

CAN Action

1. Plan to educate the public HEW

2. Suit threatened for LAAPCD todisclose information onstationary pollutors LAAPCD

130

I 18-

Below you will see a list of nine parts of the political environment

with which Riverside was interdependent. Action Riverside took both

affected and was affected by these groups. Following the list you will find

a box with nine spaces. Two spaces are filled by Riverside and CAN. By

filling the other seven groups in the appropriate boxes, you can indicate the

interdependence between Riverside and its political environment. The

dotted lines indicate an interdependence relationship between two parts of

the political environment.

Together with the other members of your group, place the seven remaining

groups in the proper boxes.

1. Riverside 6. Court

2. HEW 7. Assembly

3. LAAPCD 8. ARB

4. EPA 9. CAN

5. Governor

-----------) CAN (

RIVERSIDE

) <

T

1

1

I

Nle

-119-

CHANGE IN OPEC

In 1960, five of the world's oil producing nations formed an

organization to promote collective action in negotiations with oil

companies and oil consuming nations. Called the Organization of

Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), this group grew quickly to

include a total of twelve members. A list of OPEC nations appears

below.

Member Nations of OPEC

Iran AlgeriaSaudi Arabia LibyaKuwait QuatarIraq VenezuelaIndonesia EquadorNigeria Abu Dhabi

Three main bodies govern OPEC: the Conference, the Board of

Governors, and the Secretariat. Supreme authority rests with the

Conference which assumes responsibility for formulating general policy

for OPEC.

The Conference is composed of one representative from each

country and meets twice a year. Members have equal voting rights and

all decisions require unanimous consent of the members. The.principles

of sharing all information and cooperating on all matters relating to

the international oil industry pervade to meetings of the Conference.

Each country also appoints a representative to the OPEC Board of

Governors. The Board implements the policies developed by the Conference.

It also manages the activities of the Secretariat by approving the

nominations of department chiefs who work in the Secretariat.

132

- I 20-

The Secretariat represents the common interests of the member

nations of OPEC. While nations share their individual interests,

through the Conference, once a policy is established, the Secretariat

speaks on behalf of the organization. Five separate departments

comprise the Secretariat: 1. administration, 2. economics,

3. legal, 4. information, 5. technical. The Secretary-General

heads the Secretariat and nominations to this position require the

approval of all OPEC members.

Governing Bodies of OPEC

Secretariat Board of Governors Conference

As countries throughout the world consume more oil, they have come

to rely more on OPEC. OPEC produces far more oil than any other world

source. It also has tremendous proven oil reserves. The largest non-OPEC

reserves lie in the Soviet Union, in the North Sea, and off Alaska's

North Slope.

Until 1968 none of OPEC's members belonged to any petroleum organization

other than OPEC. This promoted good communication among all OPEC members.

However, the events following the 'Arab-Israeli war of June 1967 altered

this pattern of communication within OPEC. The war resulted in the Israeli

occupation of more than 25,000 square miles of Arab territories (in Egypt,

Jordan, and Syria). Some Arab states felt that their oil represented a

potentially powerful weapon to use against Israel and its 'supporters.

- 1 2 I

Therefore, the states imposed a selective oil embargo on the United

States, the United Kingdom and West Germany. They hoped that these

countries would exert pressure on Israel to withdraw from the occupied

Arab territories. In 1968, these countries, especially the United

States, imported a relatively small amount of oil from the Middle

East. Therefore, the embargo was relatively meaningless and the Arab

oil producers employed another policy. They adopted the following

resolution at an Arab Summit Conference in Khartum on August 29, 1967.

'The Conference of Arab Ministers of Finance, Economy

and Oil had recommended the possibility of employing

the stoppage of the flow of oil as a weapon in the

battle. However, after careful study of the matter,

the Summit Conference concluded that oil flow could

itself be used as a positive weapon in that Arab

oil represents an Arab asset which could be used to

strengthen the economies of those Arab states which

were directly affected by the aggression, thereby

enabling them to stand firm in the, battle. The

Conference therefore decided to resume oil pumping

operations on the grounds that this is an Arab asset

which can be put to use in the service of Arab aims;

and in contributing towards enabling those Arab states

which were subjected to aggression and a consequent

loss of economic resources to stand firm in their

resolve to eliminate the effects of the aggression."

Note: O.P.E.C. nations not shown include Indonesia, Venezuela and Equador

4

10

1. NIGERIA

2. ALGERIA

0*3. LIBYA

0*4. EGYPT *-

5. SAUDI ARABIAo4c

6. KUWAIT

0*7. BAHRAIN *

8. QATAR

0*9. ABU DHABI

0*10. DUBAI

NE

.

IRAQ

0*12. IRAN o

o=.- Member O.P.E.C.

1== Member O.A.P.E.C.

Iv

Iv

-123-

Following this meeting, Kuwait, Libya, and Saudi Arabia proposed the

establishment of a separate group of Arab nations to assist those Arab

countries in their fight against Israel. This new group would meet to

discuss oil matters which pertained to politics in the Middle East.

Officially founded in January of 1968, the Organization of Arab

Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) grew to include ten nations. Most

OAPEC nations were also members of OPEC but some were not. The OAPEC

Charter states that its policies must not conflict with those of OPEC

and that OPEC decisions are binding on all members of OAPEC. The map

depicts OPEC and OAPEC nations.

While both organizations concerned themselves with problems of oil

production and consumption, OAPEC's goals were primarily political. It

wanted to use its oil to unify the Arab states. When necessary, it

would use this weapon against Israel and its allies. OPEC served as a

forum where all oil producing exporting countries could meet and discuss

problems of negotiating with oil consumers. The Arab nations of OPEC

have all joined OAPEC but they continue to be members of OPEC. The

non-Arab countries such as Nigeria, Venezuela, Equador and Indonesia do

not want to join OAPEC because they do not want to waste their resources

on Middle East politics. What, then, is the effect on OPEC of this other

organization OAPEC?

Throughout the 1970's the price of oil rose steadily. As Western

nations consumed more oil, their reliance upon OPEC increased. The 1973

Arab-Israeli war provided OAPEC with an opportunity to capitalize on this

reliance. In retaliation against Israel, the Arab nations increased the

136

I 2 4 -

price of oil, cut back on their production, and imposed another embargo

on the United States. These actions forced the United States to buy more

oil from non-Arab members of OPEC. Because of the increased demand for

their oil, OPEC nations increased their price. OAPEC's goals, however,

kept it from selling its oil to Western nations. Though the embargo

severely restricted the use of oil in Western countries, it meant that

OAPEC lost money it might have made by selling its oil.

1. What change has OPEC experienced as a result of the founding of OAPEC?

2. What relationship exists between the two organizations?

3. Describe one example of interdependence between thetwo organizations.

4. How does interdependence affect change?

-125-

ACTIVITY FIVE: WHAT NEXT FOR RIVERSIDE?

As Activity One suggested, during the years 1968-1972, Riverside changed

in several ways. The years 1968-1972 saw the most smog-related action

in Riverside. In these years CAN and other groups were most active in

mobilizing support to fight smog. Additionally, during these years,

interdependence affected change by widening its scope. Innovations intro-

duced into the system, as well as aspects of the political environment

brought about changes in ideology, participation and leadership.'

Future changes in Riverside will be difficult to predict. Though

the Riverside Chamber of Commerce says smog is now on a decline in the

area, many citizens in the area dispute this assertion. The Statewide

Air Pollution Research Center at the University of California in Riverside

conducts frequent analyses of the air quality in the area. Their data

suggest that smog remains a critical problem for Riverside and the entire

South Coast Air Basin.

In 1972, Mayor Lewis submitted a plan to Governor Reagan which called

for the use of natural gas for motor vehicle fuel. The plan had a variety

of other features. The plan was ultimately rejected. Following you will

find excerpts from this plan which appear exactly as they were originally

presented. Just suppose the plan were submitted again and implemented.

138

I 26-

RESOLUTION NO. 11881*

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE,CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE GOVERNOR TO DECLARE A STATE OFEMERGENCY IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN DUE TO CONDITIONSOF DISASTER OR EXTREME PERIL TO THE SAFETY OF PERSONS ANDPROPERTY CAUSED BY AIR POLLUTION WHICH CONDITIONS, BY REASONOF THEIR MAGNITUDE,,ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE SERVICES,PERSONNEL, EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES OF ANY SINGLE COUNTYOR CITY AND REQUIRE THE COMBINED FORCES OF A MUTUAL AIDREGION OR REGIONS TO COMBAT.

WHEREAS the California Emergency Services Act Section 8550

of the California Government Code provides that the Governor has powers

under said Act and the long recognized responsibility to mitigate the

effects of man-made conditions of disaster or extreme peril to life,

property and the resources of the State, and generally to protect the

health and safety and preserve the lives and property of the people of

the State; and

WHEREAS the California Emergency Services Act provides for the per-

formance during an emergency of coordination and direction of emergency

action by the Governor; and

WHEREAS the California Emergency Services Act provides further for

rendering of mutual aid by the State government and all of its depart-

ments and agencies and by the political subdivisions of the, State of the

California Emergency ServicesAct; and

WHEREAS Section 8625 of the California Government Code provides that

the Governor is empowered to proclaim a state of emergency in an area

affected or likely to be affected by conditions of disaster or of extreme

peril to the safety of persons and property within the State caused by

conditions of air pollution if he finds that circumstances described in

subdivision (b) of Section 8558 exist and he is requested to do so by

the Mayor or Chief Executive of a City; and

139 The portions of the plan presented here were originally published bythe Office of Disaster Preparedness, Riverside, California, 1972.

- I 27-

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Governor be requested to use his

extraordinary powers to immediately implement an Emergency Plan ,requiring

a rapid and programmed conversion of all "vehicles" having four (4) or

more load bearing wheels registered to persons who reside-in the South

Coast Air Basin or which vehicles are permanently used therein, to gaseous

fuel systems.

ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the.Mayor and attested by

the City Clerk this 30th day of May, 1972.

Attest:

C).Cit

Mayor o Ci y of Riverside

, Atity of riverside

(Seal)

EMERGENCY PLAN .

Introduction

Air Pollution in the South Coast Air Bas-in can be reduced by

approximately 85 percent'almost immediately. The method for accomplish-

ing this is straightforward, simple and relatively inexpensive. In fact,

the program would be self-financing and would result in a net savings to

the consumer. Three steps are necessary:

(1) Convert Fleet vehicles in the Basin to natural gas fuel.

(2) Convert private automobiles in the area to liquid petroleum

gas (LPG) fuel.

(3) Require new vehicles sold in the area to either be equipped for

use of these fuels or to certify equal or lower pollutant emissions.

140

I 28 -

at'

WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Riverside requests, through

its Mayor, that the Governor proclaim the state pf emergency in the South

Coast Air Basin based upon the findings of the reports and other documents

appended to this resolution and incorporated herein as if fully set forth;

and

WHEREAS local authorities are inadequate to cope with the emergency

of air pollUtion by virtue of the fact that pollution crcsses many poli-

tical subdivision jurisdictional lines and borders and contaminates the

entire South Coast Basin;

WHEREAS even if the 1975 automobile emission standards were met, the

increase in number of vehicles in the South Coast Air Basin, according

to authoritative studies by the State-Wide Air Pollution Research Center,

University of California, Riverside, will cause the oxidant level to exceed

the currently established acceptable health standards, both. Federal and

State on numerous days, and, therefore, the emergency solution suggested

herein is necessary in addition to and to complement the 1975 emission

standards for-new automobiles.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of

Riverside that the Mayor of the City of Riverside is hereby directed

and empowered to request the Governor, pursuant to Section 8625 of the

California Government Code, subparagraph (b), to proclaim a state of

emergency in the South Coast Air Basin which is an area affected or likely

to be affected by conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the

safety of persons and property caused by conditions of air pollution and

that local authority is inadequate to cope with said emergency.

141

- I 29-

Implementation of these steps will result in a 90 percent reduction

in pollutant emissions from vehicles. Vehicles now contribute 94 percent

by weight of pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin; hence an overall

reduction of 85 percent will be achieved. Projections' based upon

currently planned actions show that over 80 percent of California's popu-

lation will still be breathing subquality air in 1980.

ImRlementation

There are approximately 6 million vehiclesin the South Coast Air

Basin that consume about 3 billion gallons of gasoline annually. Of these

approximately 1/2 million are fleet vehicles which consume about 30%

of the total fuel. Conversions should be made in a priority order reflecting

the total fuel consumption and age of the vehicles.

(1) Fleets should receive first priority due to their higher

fuel consumption and relative ease of conversion.

(2) Non-Fleet trucks and other heavy vehicles should receive

second priority for similar reasons.

(3) Other private vehicle priorities should be established

depending on weight and age. (Weight governs fuel consump-

tion and cars near normal age attrition should receive

lower emphasis.)

In addition, immediate notice should be served on auto makers that future

cars sold in the area will be equipped for gaseous fuel or, alternatively,

must certify pollutant levels equal or lower than gaseous fueled cars.

With appropriate priority, the conversion of fleet vehicles could be

accomplished in two years on a program similar to that shown in Figure B.

'California Implementation Plan for Achieving and Maintaining NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards. November 7, 1971.

142

I 30-

Complete conversion of all remaining vehicles would require about five

years. On such a,schedule, normal age attrition would account for 30

to 40 percent of vehicles. Maximum use should be made of industries

presently engaged in motor vehicle conversion. The primary role of the

State should be overall management. The State would need to provide

planning, incentive and the overall coordination necessary to increase

production of components and to provide for mass conversion of vehicles.

There are several options for funding and managing a conversion

program for the South Coast Basin. Exact details must be developed by

the State; however, the following guidelines are suggested:

(1) Private vehicle conversions should be mandatory and could be

provided at no direct cost to the user.

(2) Funding could be obtained from three sources:

a. A direct and immediate area tax on gasoline.

b. A tax on gaseous fuels.

c. A statewide license fee scaled according to vehicle

weight.

The gaseous fuels will average 5 or 6 cents per gallon less

than gasoline, hence no increase in fuel cost to the user would

accrue.

(3) Executive emergency powers should be used to effect rapid

implementation and to avoid industrial profiteering.

Considering attrition of 30 to 40 percent of existing vehicles over

the conversion period, the total program cost would be about 450 million

dollars. A tax levy equivalent to only 3 cents per gallon on South Coast

Basin fuel alone would finance the program in 5 years. Savings to the

consumers in fuel and maintenance costs more than over the required funds.

1 3 1

QUESTIONS

Answer the following questions about the plan. Consider what would happenin Riverside if the plan were introduced today.

1. Why was the plan developed?

2. If accepted by the Governor, how would the plan affect Riverside?

3. Name as many groups as you can who might be affected by this plan.

4. What do you think will happen in Riverside as a result of thereintroduction of the plan?

144

EXPERIMENTALMATERIALS

CLEAN IR 0A Data Packet

Judith GillespieStuart Lazarus

These experimental curriculum materials are part of a twosemester high schoolcourse, Comparing Political Experiences. This data packet is part of a unit, CleanAir Now, which is part of the Political Issues semester. The course is beingdeveloped by the High School Political. Science Curriculum Project, which isone of the projects sponsored by the American Political Science Association'sCommittee on Pre-Collegiate Education. The project is supported by funds pro-vided by the National Science Foundation. These materials cannot be duplicated,reproduced or used in any manner without the specific written approval of theHigh School Political Science Curriculum Project

Ae

High School Political Science Currie, im ProjectSocial Studies Development Center

A

513 North Park AvenueIndiana University

t.4Bloomington, Indiana 47401

10

Copyright, 1975 / The American Political Science Association

146

FOUNDERS AND LEADERS OF CAN

Don Bauer -- First CAN President

Don was elected first president of Clean Air Now on October 29, 1969.

At that lime, Don was serving as Dean of Students at a local university.

He had become quite knowledgeable about the subject of smog through an

intensive study of the subject.

He is a seventh-day Adventist minister who works mostly with young

advits. He is a highly respected member of Riverside.

Don Zimmer -- First CAN Vice-President

Don Zimmer was elected first Vice-President of CAN on October 29, 1969.

Don is an attorney working with a Riverside, California law firm. He

is identified with many civic groups in Riverside, among them the Uptown

Kiwanis Club.

Don was instrumental in the formation of CAN and is a member of CAN's

Board of Directors. He also serves as legal consultant to CAN. His

knowledge of the law is helpful in determining how state and federal

legislation might affect Riverside.

John A. Palladino -- First Chairman Government Relations Committee

John A. Palladino is an attorney who has practiced in Riverside for

over 15 years. After working for the RiverSide County Public Defender's

Office for three years, John resigned to become involved in private law

practice. He has a special interest in zoning and planning and has

organized citizen groups to fight zoning plans contrary to good zoning

practice.

146

John has worked closely with CAN since its founding. He has been a

member, a Director, and Chairman of the Government Relations Committee.

He has been active in a variety of civic organizations including the City

of Riverside General Plan, the Citizens Committee on Parks and Recreation,

the Riverside Civic League and the Planning and Conservation League. He

also has been a past chairman of the Riverside Chapter of the Sierra Club.

David D. Loge -- Press Relations DirectorBoard of Directors

In March 1970, David became Press Relations Director for CAN. Shortly

after that he was elected to CAN's Board of Directors. During this time,

David was a business analyst in the administrative offices of San Bernardino

County. David served as Press Relations Director for his local church

and was an active member of the Chamber of Commerce in Loma Linda, a community

near Riverside.

Sharon Cordaro -- Recording Secretary/Current President

Sharon has been CAN's Recording Secretary since 1970 and is its

current President. Sharon is a teacher concerned about the effect of

smog in Riverside upon her two children. "I decided I just couldn't live

in this area and not try to do something about our worst problem, air

pollution. CAN was formed because people were becoming more conscious of

the air pollution problem in this area."

Ann M. Hussey -- Secretary

Ann served as the first secretary of CAN. Although she moved to

Riverside in 1968, she quickly became involved in the community. As a

nurse, the health aspeCts of pollution have been a special concern to Ann.

147

Like many other CAN members, Ann has been very much involved in

other community organizations. She has served on the Board of the

Women's Auxiliary of the Riverside Medical Association and Chairperson

of the Environment Committee. Ann has also been active in the

Comprehensive Health Planning Association of Riverside County and she

has served as a school observer for the Riverside League of Womer Voters.

Lynn McQuern - Member Board of Directors -- 1971-2

Lynn was elected to the Board of Directors in the fall of 1971.

Lynn has served ac a co-editor of the Clean Air News, CAN's newsletter.

He is an active newspaperman and a member of several environmental

organizations.

Joe Doty -- Member Board of Directors 1971-2/Past President

Joe was elected to CAN's Board of Directors in the fall of 1972.

At the time, Joe was studying political science at the University of

California in Riverside. Joe made an effort .to learn as much as he could

about government control of air pollution. He was a member of a local

air pollution association.

Most importantly, Joe worked to find out as much as he could about

the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District. He recently completed

a report on the activities of the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control

District.

These people are just a few of many associated with CAN. However,

they do represent the political resources which most members brought to the

group.

148

Statement by Sharon Cordaro, Current President of CAN

'tAN was formed at the end of 1969 because people were becoming more

conscious of the air pollution problem in this area. Everyone always

knew that Los Angeles had a problem with air pollution, but it wasn't as

well known here until we got monitoring stations. People began to be

informed that we really had one. There's a station in Riverside. In

fact, we have two in Riverside and one in Palm Springs and one in the

Perris area, one in Corona, one in San Bernardino, quite a few.

"We had public meetings. One of the first things they did -- I

believe they had 140,000 names on a big petition and Don Bauer, who was

President, took this petition to Sacramento. There Was a big ceremony

on the Capitol steps presenting the petition to the Lieutenant Governor.

The petition says something like, "we believe that we have the right to

clean air and we want something done about it legislatively." So, that

was one that got a lot of publicity in the paper, of course. We put out

newsletters periodically and then about three years later a slide show

was developed. There were several copies of that which we still use.

This has been given to thousands of people, all kinds of groups, church

groups, Kiwanis, service clubs, and schools. We called the Speaker's

Bureau and had,publicity and then the word just spreads around. We also

have pamphlets and things that we give out.

"Because we are a volunteer group, we had some problems. When you're

depending on volunteers to staff it and to do all the nitty gritty work

that has to be done to help it survive, it's tough to get started. I think

149

publicity is one of the main things -- getting articles in the paper about

what you are doing and then the newsletter. We have a membership campaign

on right now because we have had a membership not as large in the last

couple of years. As it was in the earlier days, this is partly because

some of our officers were pursuing legal matters and were not as active

in the local area. They were prosecuting the Los Angeles Air Pollution

Control District, so that reduced the number of people able to do things

locally, and our local membership did drop. Now, we're basically in

San Bernardino and Riverside counties, but we have members from as far

away as Palm Springs and a number of towns within 15 miles.

"We send out renewal letters to the members each year. Now we are

revising our membership files. I have a very good membership chairman,

who is going to send a renewal letter to people at the time that their

dues are coming due.

"When the Clean Air amendments passed in 1970, states were supposed

to make a plan as to how they could meet these standards, and if they

did not make a plan, then the EPA was supposed to impose a plan.

California did not come up with one. The EPA set forth this one that

included gasoline rationing among other options -- and charging a person

five dollars a day to park at their office building. Anyway, then th,j

had to come around and have hearings on this plan; public hearings to

see how the people reacted to this plan. Of course, the reaction was

very adverse, because there were very radical things in there.

150

"I went to the hearings here in Riverside, and CAN made a statement.

Also, I made a personal statement at that meeting and many organizations

did. CAN's position at that time was that we would accept gas rationing,

and our members would, if that's what we needed to Cean up the air. We

felt that that was the most important thing. If people had to ration gas,

they would be able to work it out. °After all of this happened, though,

you get to wonder whether it was really valid, this whole business of

hearings. Now you see the EPA has recommended that Congress amend the

'77 standards, which is something we're very upset about."

151

Worksheet for Clean Air Now Data Packet

Now many members belong to CAN?

2. What goals guide the-activities of the organization?

3. What political resources do the founders and leaders have?

Name Resources

4. Give three examples of the methods used by CAN to support the fightfor clean air?

5. Would you join a group led by these people? Why or why not?

152

6. How successful do you think CAN will be?

Why?

...

7. What relationship exists between the successful organization of agroup and political resources of the group's leaders?

153

Worksheet for Clean Air Now Data Packet

1. How many members belong to CAN?

2. What goals guide the activities of the organization?

3. What political resources do the founders and leaders have?

Name Resources

4. Give three examples of the methods used by CAN to support the fightfor clean air?

5. Would you join a group led by these people? Why or why not?

6. Now successful do you think CAN will be?

Why?

7. What relationship exists between the successful organization of a

group and political resources of the group's leaders?

155 R-

Worksheet for Clean Air Now Data Packet

1. How many members belong to CAN?

2. What goals guide the activities of the organization?

3. What political resources do the founders and leaders have?

Name Resources

4. Give three examples of the methods used by CAN to support the fightfor clean air?

5. Would you join a group led by these people? Why or why not?

6. How successful do you think CAN will be?

Why?

7. What relationship exists between thegroup and political resources of the

successful organization of agroup's leaders?

EiWorksheet for Clean Air Now Data Packet

1. Now many members belong to CAN?

2. What goals guide the activities of the organization?

3. What political resources do the founders and leaders have?

Name Resources

4. Give three examples of the methods used by CAN to support the fightfor clean air?

5. Would you join a group led by these people? Why or why not?

6. How successful do you think CAN will be?

Why?

7. What relationship exists between the successful organization of a

group and political resources of the group's leaders?

Additional materiL.1.s, such as reprints of "Clean Air News (CAN),"removed to conform with copyright laws.

159